Obstructing Legal Process Case Results

Obstructing Legal Process Case Results

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

State v. C.E.

September, 2019
Charges: Felony 1st Degree Burglary, Assault, and Aid and Abet counts

Case entirely DISMISSED, recharged single count of Misdemeanor Burglary, with a Stay of Adjudication. Client avoids a permanent turpitude felony, or worse, with this negotiated outcome. A raid on a drug seller's house, with multiple injuries and gunpoint-threat allegations, resolves without a conviction for a young and talented man, now facing a future without limitations and without a day spent in custody. Absolutely stellar outcome, which would not have been possible without patience and thoughtfulness provided by Mr. Adkins and the North Star Team.

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.

State v. D.J.

August, 2016
Charges: Felony drug charge, obstructing legal process, etc.

Diversion program. We are often approached by clients who have made an initial appearance in court, expecting a soft landing, who have been advised they don't qualify for diversion, or another favorable program to resolve their matter. In this instance, a patient approach with a thoughtful prosecutor resulted in a late-admission into diversionary outcome that was utterly unavailable at arraignment. These sorts of outcomes quite literally make our month.

State v. A.B.

June, 2016
Charges: Client had four pending cases - 3 separate cases with the same charge - DANCO Violation - and the fourth case included the following charges: 4th Degree Assault of an Officer, Obstruction of Legal Process, 4th Degree DWI, DANCO Violation, and petty drug possession. These four cases were venued in two different counties - Anoka and St. Louis.

The client pled to three misdemeanor charges:

  1. Obstruction of Legal Process;
  2. 4th Degree DWI;
  3. DANCO Violation.

The client has no jail time to serve and must complete standard programming for chemical dependency and domestic abuse. This was an incredible result for a client that, at one time, had five pending domestic-related matters.

In the end, he will have no new jail time, minimal fines, and be on probation with standard conditions. For a young man with no criminal record, limiting the damage to only one domestic-related conviction, a single DWI, and an obstruction charge, is a home run.

The client is ecstatic and thrilled with this outcome.

Obstructing Legal Process Case Results

Schedule a Free Consultation

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.