Obstructing Legal Process Case Results

To see just how successful our approach is, here are some representative results:

State v. J.B.

February, 2023
Charges: Obstructing Legal Process - Misdemeanor

Continuance for dismissal. Client was facing a bogus charge because he ran his mouth in a very inebriated state of mind. Cop was sensitive and charged him with obstructing legal process. The North Star team brought an aggressive approach, including filing a motion to dismiss for a lack of probable cause. On the date of the hearing, the prosecutor finally offered the only reasonable plea deal that the client should consider. And while we wanted to fight it, the guaranteed outcome for only 6-months was too good to pass up and allowed the client to put this in the past and move forward with his clean record intact.

State v. M.K.

June, 2020
Charges: Obstructing Legal Process - Gross Misdemeanor; Fleeing on Foot, Underage Consumption, Fake ID, and Public Urination - Misdemeanors

Stay of Adjudication to the Fleeing on Foot charge and a petty misdemeanor conviction for the underage consumption charge. The remaining charges were dismissed. With a stay of adjudication, the client is never convicted of the offense, so long as he abides by manageable terms of probation for one-year. And after he does this, he will walk away from this case without a single criminal conviction on his record since the petty misdemeanor conviction is not a crime under Minnesota law. For a college student who was doing well and has a bright future, avoiding a long-lasting criminal conviction record was necessary. Thankfully, he heeded North Star's advice to take proactive steps that convinced the prosecutor that he was a good kid, who just made some poor decisions one night. Another fantastic result for our client.

State v. C.W.

February, 2020
Charges: Obstruction of Legal Process and Reckless Driving - both misdemeanors

Plea to an amended count of speeding as a petty misdemeanor. The client was wrongfully charged with obstructing legal process and reckless driving. The obstruction charge is a very serious offense, but it was based simply on the officer believing my client was lying to him. Even if true, lying to an officer during the course of an investigation is not a crime. On top of that, the record was completely void of true evidence to support the reckless driving charge. Once retained, the North Star team set out on a course of aggressive litigation against both charges. Realizing the case was weak, the State offered the only type of charge that the facts supported. The client accepted, knowing the value of the guaranteed result - a petty misdemeanor speeding ticket - which would not lead to any job consequences. He was thrilled with the result, to say the least.

State v. S.M.

June, 2018
Charges: Felony 4th Degree Assault (of an Officer) and Gross Misdemeanor Obstruction of Legal Process

Stay of adjudication to the assault charge. Offenses involving harming an officer and disobeying their commands are often difficult to resolve in a favorable manner. Almost always, the prosecutor will want a permanent conviction. Yet, Mr. Gempeler was able to get a stay of adjudication, which means the client will not have a conviction following her successful completion of probation. Another terrific result - and this was in a county in which Mr. Gempeler had yet to practice in, proving that our approach works across the State.

State v. M.D.

January, 2018
Charges: 3 separate cases out of two counties. In one county, the client had two cases: one misdemeanor obstruction of legal process and one misdemeanor public intoxication. In the other county, the client picked up a misdemeanor disorderly conduct and fleeing on foot.

Stays of adjudication on the obstruction of legal process and disorderly conduct charges, and then a petty misdemeanor sentence for the public intoxication. Because of this incredible result, the client's future is saved. He is a National Guard member and would have been barred from being deployed later this year and possibly discharged from the service if he was convicted of these offenses. The primary county initially was steadfast in claiming it needed a plea to the obstruction charge because the client already had a stay of adjudication in the other county. Yet, with the right approach by Mr. Gempeler and some proactive measures taken by the client, the State agreed to give the client a second chance and earn the right to keep his future intact. It's a tremendous result and shows just how committed the team at North Star is in looking big picture and fighting for your future.

State v. W.K.

April, 2017
Charges: Obstruct Legal Process, 5th Degree Assault (2 Counts), and Disorderly Conduct

Case was dismissed. Mr. Gempeler utilized a big picture approach with a like-minded and thoughtful prosecutor to prove that the client was simply not the person that committed the alleged offense. Instead, the client was at a low point, caused by mental health issues. Over the course of a year since the date of the incident, the client took significant and meaningful strides to improve his mental health and gain stability in his life, thus demonstrating that he was not a public safety concern. The prosecutor recognized this and agreed that a dismissal was appropriate and deserved. This is the type of personalized legal strategy that North Star offers its clients - an understanding of who they are, what happened, and how to get them back on their feet, which benefits them personally, but also leads to these type of terrific results.

State v. A.I.

December, 2016
Charges: Obstructing legal process, License Plate Fraud

Continuance for Dismissal. This matter was resolved by a continuance for dismissal, that in early negotiations was termed "impossible" to achieve. Hard work by Mr. Adkins, and careful avoidance of additional silly decision-making by a wise and creative client, meant the impossible became par for the course. This matter also exemplifies the importance of a client participating meaningfully in the process; his videotape evidence was essential in moving a prosecutor from leery to sympathetic.

State v. E.A.

December, 2016
Charges: Obstructing Legal Process - Misdemeanor

Dismissed. Client has a clean criminal record, which was imperative to maintain in order for him to continue volunteering with his kids extra-curricular activities. The initial offer - a stay of adjudication, which would have resulted in a dismissal - was authorized to be accepted by the client. Still, Mr. Gempeler knew that the right approach to pushing the City Attorney could lead to a better result. After further negotiations and discussions, the City Attorney agreed that there was no merit for the charge.

State v. A.S.

November, 2016
Charges: Obstructing Legal Process - Misdemeanor

Continuance for Dismissal - 6 mo. and costs of only $100. Typically, city prosecutors are reluctant to make reasonable offers on this type of charge. Mr. Gempeler was aggressive in asserting that the charges were trumped up. Short of a contested hearing, the prosecutor agreed that a continuance for dismissal for a short six months was appropriate. The client simply couldn't turn this offer down because it got the result deserved and desired - a dismissal. In addition, there is a mutual understanding that the client will get an expungement after the six months. A terrific result for a young and deserving client.

State v. N.A.

October, 2016
Charges: Gross Misdemeanor Second Degree DWI, Obstructing Legal Process

This high-test DUI with general non-compliance (to put it politely) from the client to local police upon arrest was successfully reduced to a misdemeanor after careful negotiations, supportive therapies for and by the client, and great good luck in finding a prosecutor and a judge in remarkably workable good moods on the day of trial. Client escapes a life-altering outcome through his own hard work and the talents of his team at North Star.