State of Minnesota v. C.C. (Itasca County, 2019)
The State charged Client with 1st Degree Assault of a Child by Inflicting Great Bodily Harm and Felony Malicious Punishment of a Child. The child suffered major injuries to the child’s head, back, and internal organs. From the get-go, the State believed that Client intentionally caused these injuries because he was the only one with the child at the time of the injuries, Client’s narratives were inconsistent, and the medical professionals opined that the only way these injuries were caused were through child abuse. However, Client unequivocally maintained his innocence. Through unrelenting private investigation, we hired a forensic engineer and a doctor who contrarily opined that the injuries sustained by the Client were not a product of child abuse, but an accidental fall consistent with the evidence obtained at the scene. After the jury trial, Client was found NOT GUILTY. If Client was found guilty, Client would have been imprisoned for 8 years. Client was able to successfully move forward with his life in a positive way.
State of Minnesota v. O.J. (Ramsey County, 2017)
Client was charged with a felony violation of an Order for Protection. Based on the fact that my client has multiple prior Order for Protection violations, along with a violent criminal history, the State desired to send Client to prison. However, through the defense adamantly asserted that Client did not engage in a willful violation of the order as Client was only attempting to make known concerns about the protected children. On the eve of trial, the State agreed with Client’s position and DISMISSED all charges against Client. Justice truly was served.
State of Minnesota v. K.T. (Hennepin County, 2016)
Client, who was a bus driver, was charged with assault after striking a passenger. However, the investigation proved that Client was provoked through a host of gestures and derogatory comments due to Client’s unwillingness to provide a free ride. The State DISMISSED all charges against Client as there was insufficient evidence of an unwarranted assault. Client can move forward in Client’s life without the stain of a criminal conviction. Justice truly was served.
State of Minnesota v. K.B. (Anoka County, 2016)
Client was called charged with gross misdemeanor violation of an order for protection based on allegations levied by his ex-wife during nasty separation. However, through the use of vigorous private investigation we were able to prove that Client did not commit any violation, nor instructed anyone to make any contact whatsoever. These cases often rest on “he-said she-said” and one needs to work hard to prove one’s innocence otherwise a conviction is almost a certainty. That is what we did, and Client can move on successfully with Client’s life.
State of Minnesota v. DEH (Hennepin County, 2015)
Client was charged with 2nd Degree Assault with a Dangerous Weapon after Client allegedly poured gasoline on another person. The defense centered around the fact gas was poured on a piece of property near where the alleged victim was standing, and the alleged victim only accidentally had gas poured on him. There was no intentional act committed against the alleged victim. On the eve of trial, the State DISMISSED the charged alleged. Client was ecstatic as he could move forward in a positive way with his life.
State of Minnesota v. MY (Ramsey County, 2015)
Client was charged with 2nd Degree Assault with a Deadly Weapon after Client shot a gun at a person causing people to evacuate his house in the early morning hours. The alleged victim said as much in a recorded interview to law enforcement shortly thereafter. However, private investigation and rigorously scrutiny of every piece of evidence presented by the State, we filled in the gaps left by law enforcement’s investigation. Client was intoxicated and we placed the parties in the house–emphasizing the distance away versus the angle and direction of shot–through corroborating testimony, uncovering crucial facts not touched by law enforcement, and used Client’s lack of overt violent or assaultive behavior to develop the defense that Client did specifically intent to cause fear of immediate bodily harm or death in another person. Client’s case was tried to a jury and Client was found NOT GUILTY of 2nd Degree Assault with a Deadly Weapon.
State of Minnesota v. C.T. (Dakota County, 2015)
Client was charged with felony Terroristic Threats and 2nd Degree Assault with a Deadly Weapon. The State would not budge with its negotiations to keep a felony on my client’s record and to imprison said client for a substantial amount of time. Through rigorous private investigation, we uncovered facts that severely cut at the the heart of the alleged victim’s credibility. We used that unique knowledge to push the case to trial, which caused the State to DISMISS the case. Relentless advocacy resulted in the dismissal.
State of Minnesota v. J.W.S (Kanabec County, 2015):
Client was charged with an 8 count indictment including 2nd Degree Assault with a Deadly Weapon. The case was ugly at the outset, but as we peeled back the layers of the case, we were able to bolster our client’s defense and cut down the validity of the facts initially reported by law enforcement. Prior to the commencement of trial, the State agreed to DISMISS the 2nd Degree Assault with a Deadly Weapon charge.
State of Minnesota v. K.B. (Anoka County, 2015):
Client was charged with Gross Misdemeanor Assault after the victim alleged that Client chest bumped her during a child exchange at a public place. Because Client had a prior assault against the victim, the State enchanted the charge to a Gross Misdemeanor. Client maintained his innocence. Through relentless private investigation, we found an eye-witness who attested that Client did not touch the victim. On the eve of trial, the State agreed to DISMISS the charges against Client. Perseverance paid enormous dividends.
State of Minnesota v. J.P (Dakota County, 2014):
Client was charged with Second Degree Assault with a Dangerous Weapon. Client was intoxicated and got into an argument with her brother. The argument escalated and Client allegedly grabbed a knife, held it to Client’s brother’s throat, and threatened to severely harm him. Client was found NOT GUILTY of the assault because we established that Client did not use the knife in a deadly manner. Client’s hand covered the blade of the knife and the brother was easily able to pry to knife from Client’s hand, which nullified any deadly intent as the only person harmed was Client by having Client’s hand sliced open by the knife blade.
State of Minnesota v. J.S. (Wright County, 2014):
Client was charged with Domestic Assault and Terroristic Threats stemming from an altercation at Client’s house. Client and the alleged victim were getting a divorce but still living together. Client came home to find the alleged victim in a compromising situation with another man. Client and the alleged victim got into a heated argument and Client was charged with Domestic Assault and Terroristic Threats. Through the use of private investigation and vigorous advocacy, the Terroristic Threats and Domestic Assault charges were DISMISSED.
State of Minnesota v. E.M.M. (Hennepin County, 2013):
Client was charged with felony Terroristic Threats. Client was a student and an immigrant living in Minnesota on a student via trying to betters his and his family’s life and was working a couple of full-time jobs. Client was living in an apartment and allowed his girlfriend, her girlfriend’s children, and her girlfriend’s aunt to live with him for free. Client and his girlfriend decided to break up but Client allowed them to stay with him until they could find a place of their own. This went on for some time and Client eventually asked them to move out. In the process of doing so, the aunt alleged that Client held a knife and threatened to kill her if they did not move out. The children were also present and law enforcement elicited very unfavorable statements from the aunt and the children. Client maintained total innocence. Through the use of private investigation and tireless advocacy, we presented our Client’s narrative as to what really happened to the State. The State DISMISSED the case due to our investigation because it showed that the charges had no merit and that our client did not threaten the aunt or the children.
State of Minnesota v. D.D. (Pine County, 2013):
Client was a very well-respected community member. One night Client and his wife engaged in an argument within the confines of their own residence. The police were called and upon their arrival, Client did not permit them to enter his house and did not immediately tell them Client’s name. The State charged Client with Disorderly Conduct. A Judge DISMISSED the State’s charges because simply not giving permission to the police to enter one’s home (absent more serious circumstances) and not stating a name on police’s command, does not suffice Disorderly Conduct.