Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer

DWI arrests are on the rise in Minnesota and according to the Golden Valley Patch it’s evident in the percentage of residents who have such a drunk driving charge on their record. One in seven licensed drivers has a DWI on their record. read more

Across the country this weekend people will be celebrating. They’ll be attending cook outs, parties, or simply enjoying the extra day off. Also across the country this weekend the police will be on the lookout for drunk drivers.

Increased DWI enforcement isn’t unique to Labor Day weekend. In fact, it’s not unusual at all for police read more

A Minnesota news report this week notes that state lawmakers are considering legislation requiring DWI offenders to have an ignition interlock device (IID) installed in their vehicles. Mandatory in many states for multiple DWI offenders, ignition interlock devices are designed to stop people with DWI convictions from driving drunk again. read more

If you live in Anoka or Ramsey County and are caught driving drunk, “the courts are going to hammer you,” according to a DWI victims advocate in this article from the Star Tribune. These two counties have been notably tough on DWI offenders and have seen the largest declines in alcohol related accidents across the state. read more

The Minnesota state legislature is considering a bill that would require ignition interlock devices be installed in the vehicles of all DWI offenders, even for a first offense. read more

An upheld conviction in the Minnesota Supreme Court further expands the situations in which a person can be arrested, charged, and found guilty of DWI. Many people mistakenly think that exerting control over the vehicle means driving it. Not so, says the court’s most recent decision. read more

Here is an informative article about the pilot program for ignition interlock devices that prevent a DWI offender from starting his vehicle without passing an on-board breathalyzer test. read more

A 40 year old Inver Grove Heights mother is facing a charge of DUI for an incident that could potentially lead to charges of child endangerment. The woman was caught driving drunk with her son in the car. read more

A ruling in the Minnesota Supreme Court has made a serious headache for prosecutors across the state. The headache stems from DWI breath tests done with Intoxilyzer equipment. The Supreme Court agreed that prosecutors should turn over the source code to this equipment if the defendant requests it. The problem with that is, the prosecution doesn’t have the source code.

The source code is a sort of computer language used in the Intoxilyzer equipment. These machines are manufactured by a Kentucky company that insists the source code is a trade secret and won’t divulge the information. Because of this, many cases hinging on breath test evidence could be jeopardized for the prosecution.

Minnesota isn’t the first state to have issue with obtaining source code. Many states across the country utilize the Intoxilyzers and many have run into the same predicament. read more

Stay Far Away from your Car to Prevent a DWI

Every state’s DWI laws are slightly different from one another. How they are applied from county to county can even differ. In Minnesota, you don’t even have to drive to pick up a DWI charge. That’s right a “Driving While Intoxicated” charge without even driving.

According to this story from the Star Tribune Daryl Fleck passed out in his car and was convicted of DWI. According to Fleck’s attorneys he had went out to his vehicle to retrieve something when he decided to take a seat. Being intoxicated, he then passed out.

When the police arrived Fleck was in the vehicle and the keys were in between the seats. Fleck wasn’t even sure initially where he had put the keys. Despite the fact that he was not driving and did not intend to drive, his arrest and subsequent conviction was upheld by the Minnesota Court of Appeals.

The law states that you can be charged with DWI if you have “physical control” over the vehicle when you have a blood alcohol level over the legal limit (.08%). “Physical control” was the term in question here and apparently because the keys were within reach the court found that Fleck was in physical control of the vehicle. read more