Minnesota Criminal Defense Attorney & Lawyer : Minneapolis Criminal Defense Law Firm : Brown Law Offices : St. Paul, Twin Cities MN

Attorney.org has recognized the Minnesota Criminal Defense Blog as a top criminal law blog for 2009-2010. The Blog, published by defense attorney Jason C. Brown, of the Brown Law Offices, P.A. is the first of its kind in Minnesota.

Since going live in early 2008 over 17,000 unique readers have turned to the Minnesota Criminal Defense Blog for useful information, insight and commentary on criminal defense issues unique to Minnesota.

"Our goal in publishing a criminal defense blog is being realized," says Jason Brown. "I am able to reach thousands of unique readers each month and provide potential clients with much more than a name and phone number. Our blog, and web site, are packed with helpful information."

If you have a suggestion for a post, please contact us at your convenience. To keep up with Minnesota criminal defense issues via RSS or email, please click the appropriate link on the left side of any of our pages.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In an effort to make the Minnesota Rules of Criminal Procedure more useful, the Minnesota Supreme Court has taken a complete re-write of the rules under advisement and will hold a hearing relative to these revisions on June 30, 2009 at 2:00 PM. A complete copy of the proposed rules may be found at the Minnesota Supreme Court web site.

According to Barbara Jones, associate editor with the Minnesota Lawyer newspaper, what started as a re-working of Rule 26 evolved into a complete overhaul of the present Minnesota Rules of Criminal Procedure over a 19 month time frame. If the new rules are accepted by the Supreme Court, the hope of the Rules Committee is to have these in use and publication by the fall of 2010.

The amended Minnesota Rules of Criminal Procedure would contain a more user-friendly approach to the criminal process, including a number of checklists to accompany various hearings, such as omnibus and arraignment appearances. The present framework has been in place since 1975, with many piecemeal amendments made along the way.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Do I have to answer the questions asked by the police?

You have the constitutional right to remain silent. It is not a criminal act to refuse to answer questions. It is a good idea to talk to a lawyer before agreeing to answer questions. You do not have to talk to anyone, even if you have been arrested or are in jail. Only a judge can order you to answer questions.

Can I talk to a lawyer?

You have the right to talk to a lawyer before you answer questions, whether or not the police inform you of that right. The job of a criminal lawyer is to protect your rights. Once you say that you want to talk to an attorney, officers should stop asking you questions. Even if you do not have a lawyer, you may still tell the officer you want to speak with one before answering questions. If you have a lawyer, keep his or her business card with you. Show it to the officer, and ask to call your lawyer. Remember to get the name, agency and telephone number of any investigator who visits you, and give that information to your lawyer.

Can the police search my home or office?

The police, or other law enforcement agents, cannot search your home unless you give them permission, or unless they have a search warrant. A search warrant is a court order that allows the police to conduct a specified search. Interfering with the search probably will not stop it and you might get arrested. But you should say clearly that you have not given your consent and that the search is against your wishes. Your roommate or guest can legally consent to a search of your house if the police believe that person has the authority to give consent. Police and law enforcement need a warrant to search an office, but your employer can consent to a search of your workspace without your permission.

What if the police have a search warrant?

If you are present when agents come for the search, you can ask to see the warrant. The warrant must specify in detail the places to be searched and the people or things to be taken away. Call a lawyer as soon as possible. In addition, ask if you are allowed to watch the search. If you are allowed to, you should. Take notes, including names, badge numbers, what agency each officer is from, where they searched and what they took. If others are present, have them act as witnesses to watch carefully what is happening.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Thanks to the professionals with DecisionQuest, a jury consulting firm with offices across the country (including right here in the Twin Cities), for their jury selection tips. In a recent article entitled "Jury Selection: Myths and Realities," they provide the following suggestions to criminal defense attorneys and their clients during voir dire:

• Do try to make a good impression, but do not worry about whether certain members of your team are present or whether a jury consultant is sitting with you.  It is important to have the client present, simply because his or her absence can be interpreted as not caring about the case.  Do warn observers who are witnesses that they should come dressed appropriately in case they are introduced.  Try to appear respectful of jurors’ time and their privacy, and be organized in your questioning. 
• Do ask the judge for some form of individual sequestered questioning to avoid having to ask important but potentially embarrassing or personal questions in front of the panel.  It is optimal to be able to talk individually with each potential juror, but this process may not be allowed in all jurisdictions.  The justification can often be made that your particular case involves issues that must be discussed privately.
• Do come up with a profile of unfavorable and favorable jurors recognizing that experiences that are relevant to the case are more important than demographics.  Pay particular attention to the occupational and socioeconomic status of participants, but recognize that people are sensitive about being judged based on what they do to earn a living.  Because it is usually necessary to make some judgments based on individuals’ demographic characteristics, especially if voir dire is brief, consider the life experiences that individuals may have had that are related to their demographics.
• Do prioritize strikes focusing on the “worst jurors,” and have a system for rating jurors that the team can agree to use.  I use a five-point rating system, the continuum of which goes from “two minuses” to “two pluses” with neutral in between.
• Do make sure that, if possible, you get a chance to see and hear each juror speak, even if it is just introducing him or herself.  However, do not waste time thoroughly interviewing jurors who are so far down the list that it is highly unlikely that you will ever get to them.  Obviously, you don’t want to make anyone in the “back row” feel different, but often the process involves following up with jurors scattered throughout the gallery as well as in the box.  It is important to hear from each juror, but a great deal of time is sometimes wasted talking with jurors who will never be selected. 
• Do encourage openness and honesty as norms, versus being fair and impartial, to create an atmosphere in which jurors feel free to express their potential biases.  In the end, the jurors can be encouraged to be fair and impartial in their approach to the case, but after an atmosphere of disclosure is created.
• Do keep in mind that jurors will often say that they can be impartial, but you must trust your gut about whether or not that is true.  Remember, most people are bad judges of their own biases, and may even believe they can overcome them, but sometimes their situation or their demographics would suggest otherwise.
• Do use the opportunity to present your case in a positive, or at a minimum, neutral light, and use voir dire to inoculate jurors about potentially negative issues in the case.
• Do ask the judge to request a sufficiently large panel of jurors to have comfort that if jurors do express biases, there will be enough jurors to complete your panel in the appropriate timeframe.
• Do not place undo emphasis on the non-verbal behavior of a juror, with the exception of grooming, clothing choices, and surreptitious indicators.  Remember that the world has changed, and most jurors do not come to court in their “Sunday Best” anymore.  The norm for a given age group and in society is important to consider.  Body piercing, for example, is not an automatic sign of a rebellious personality in young people; it is actually quite typical.
• Have at least one other person who is skilled at jury selection attend with you to take notes, to remind you of missed questions or jurors, to observe the panel, and to provide another opinion.  Jury selection is far too complicated a process to engage in alone.

Great tips. Jury selection is one of the most difficult things to accomplish in a criminal case. It makes a huge difference if you have the right panel deciding your case. Jury consultants are just one of many options to consider.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

A plea in Minnesota must be made knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently. This means that the defendant in a criminal case must acknowledge that they understand all of their rights and, more importantly, the fact that they are waiving them. In every case, this is done verbally (on the record) and in writing (through a signed Petition to Enter Plea of Guilty in Minnesota).

The following must be acknowledged by the defendant prior to the acceptance of a plea agreement: 

• I feel that I have had sufficient time to discuss my case with my attorney.
• I am satisfied that my attorney is fully informed as to the facts of this case.
• My attorney has discussed possible defenses to the crime that I might have.
• I am satisfied that my attorney has represented my interests and has fully advised me.
• I know that I could now move that the complaint against me be dismissed for lack of probable cause and I know that if I do not make such a motion and go ahead with entering my plea of guilty, I waive all right to successfully object to the absence of a probable cause hearing.
• I also know that I waive all right to successfully object to any errors in the probable cause hearing when I enter my plea of guilty.
• That I have a right to a pre-trial hearing before a judge to determine whether or not the evidence the prosecution has could be used against me if I went to trial in this case.
• That if I requested such a pre-trial hearing I could testify at the hearing if I wanted to, but my testimony could not be used as substantive evidence against me if I went to trial in this case.
• That I do not now request such a pre-trial hearing and I specifically now waive my right to have such a pre-trial hearing.
• That whether or not I have had such a hearing I will not be able to object tomorrow or any other time to the evidence that the prosecutor has.
• That if I wish to plead not guilty I am entitled to a trial by a jury on the issue of guilt, and all jurors would have to agree I was guilty before the jury could find me guilty.
• That if I plead guilty I will not have a trial by either a jury or by a judge without a jury.
• I have been told by my attorney and I understand that if I wish to plead not guilty and have a trial by jury or trial by a judge I would be presumed innocent until my guilt is proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
• That if I wish to plead not guilty and have a trial the prosecutor would be required to have the witnesses testify against me in open court in my presence and that I would have the right, through my attorney, to question these witnesses.
• That if I wish to plead not guilty and have a trial I would be entitled to require any witnesses that I think are favorable to me to appear and testify at trial.

The entry of a plea is a serious matter that cannot easily be undone. The failure to fully understand your rights at this state of the criminal process, however, could potentially facilitate a withdrawal of a plea. For that reason, the state will proceed very cautiously in making sure that the record reflects that you fully understand the nature of the proceedings and the rights you are waiving.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

An act of arson in Minnesota involves voluntarily, maliciously and willfully setting fire to the property of another, or burning property that you own for an inappropriate purpose, such as fraudulent insurance claims. 

The severity of the offense is deterimined by assessing the dollar value of the property or nature of the injury or death to the victim of the fire. Other factors that contribute to the degree of arson charges include whether the structure was inhabited by a person, the time of day in which the fire occurred, and the proximity of a person's residence to the burned structure. Minnesota arson statutes outline six arson crimes:

• First Degree Arson
• Second Degree Arson
• Third Degree Arson
• Fourth Degree Arson
• Wildfire Arson
• Negligent Fires

For years, fire investigators have been instructed to look for key "indicators" of arson activity. Crazed glass, melted copper wiring, and melted steel were all said to indicate an unusually hot fire, consistent with the use of accelerants. Uneven burn patterns were said to indicate multiple ignition points, another indicator of arson. These methods of fire investigation appear to provide a "scientific" basis for expert opinions as to whether arson is involved in a particular case. However, more up-to-date research suggests that much of the conventional wisdom of these theories are simply wrong.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

A “pretrial” hearing is a person’s last court appearance on a criminal charge prior to trial. At this hearing, the parties generally have gathered all the information they need to fully negotiate the case, including crime victim input.

In negotiating the case, the prosecuting attorney will consider the following factors:

• Severity of the crime and its impact upon the victim and/or community; 
• Criminal history of the defendant;
• Defendant’s age and physical and/or mental health;
• Whether the defendant expresses genuine remorse;
• Defendant’s willingness to make restitution;
• Victim’s preferences in how the case should be handled; and 
• The likelihood of conviction at trial.

If the parties are unable to resolve the case, a trial date will be set. Ongoing negotiation with the prosecutor will continue pending trial.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Our law firm recently represented an indvidual charged with arson. Upon reviewing the complaint, our lawyers determined that the State of Minnesota lacked probable cause in claiming that an act of arson occurred. Once an individual is charged with a crime in Minnesota, the issue of probable cause becomes critical.

In each case, the court must determine whether the crime with which an individual has been charged can stick if all of the facts outlined by the State in its complaint are accepted as true. In this case, our lawyers argued that even if the facts were accepted as true as outlined in the State’s complaint, as a matter of law the defendant could not be convicted of arson. Our persistence paid off and the county attorney ultimately agreed to reduce the charge to one count of disorderly conduct.

In this particular instance, the State alleged that the defendant committed an act of arson by dumping large quantities of gasoline on a roadway and lighting it on fire. However, the relevant statute makes it quite clear that an arson charge must involve damage to property “of value.” Our firm argued that because no damage was done to the road and, because no damage could have been done to the road, it did not qualify as property “of value” within the meaning of the statute.

As a result of pleading to a public nuisance, our client was ordered to perform four (4) hours of community service. The State sought substantial consequences. Our concern for this client involved the contents of his criminal record. It will be much easier for him to address prior involvement in the court system because of a public nuisance situation rather than a conviction for arson.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link