Appelman Law Firm Case Studies
The defense lawyers at Appelman Law Firm are skilled at obtaining favorable results for their clients. Here are just a few of Appelman Law Firm’s recent successes in Minnesota criminal defense. *Note: All names have been changed to protect client identities.
State vs. J.T.
BWI Offense – Child Endangerment
Avery Appelman represented J.T., who was charged with operating a motor boat with passengers under the age of 16 on board while intoxicated. The case went to jury trial, where Mr. Appelman successfully cross-examined the state’s law enforcement witnesses. Mr. Appelman diligently prepared for the case and presented such a persuasive defense that the jury returned a not guilty verdict in 15 minutes.
State vs. D.C.
An example of cutting edge Minnesota DWI defense. Avery Appelman’s client, D.C., was charged with a misdemeanor DWI for having a blood alcohol concentration in excess of the legal limit. The client suffers from gastro esophageal reflux (acid reflux) which manifested itself by the perpetual regurgitation of stomach contents into his mouth. Mr. Appelman, employing the use of a forensic toxicologist, successfully argued that the breath test to which D.C. submitted was inaccurate and unreliable. The court ordered D.C.’s driver’s license reinstated and ultimately the state prosecution was resolved with a plea to a petty misdemeanor (non-criminal) speeding charge.
State vs. D.D.
D.D., one of Avery Appelman’s clients, was charged with a DWI in Dakota County. Avery challenged the validity of the stop of D.D.’s vehicle. A Dakota County judge agreed that D.D. was stopped for no justifiable reason and reinstated his driving privileges. The state ultimately dismissed the criminal case against D.D.
State vs. R.L.
Another one of Avery Appelman’s successful DWI representations! R.L. was driving a vehicle when he was struck on two sides by vehicles involved in a deadly collision on the opposite side of the road. Although not in any way involved in the accident, the police forced R.L. to submit to a blood test which revealed the presence of cocaine. Avery Appelman successfully pointed out the lack of probable cause necessary to compel a blood test, and the state was forced to dismiss the DWI charges against R.L.
State vs. E.M.
E.M. was charged with a DWI, and then Avery Appelman began to represent her. Once involved in the case, Mr. Appelman investigated the facts surrounding E.M’s encounter with the police and argued that the police could not prove she was actually driving the vehicle. As a direct result of Avery’s arguments, E.M.’s case was dismissed
State vs. J.S.
J.S. was a Northwest Airline mechanic who worked with chemicals. These chemicals were absorbed into J.S.’s body and, as a result, his breath test was contaminated. The court found J.S.’s breath test to be inaccurate and unreliable and reinstated J.S.’s driver’s license. The state dismissed the criminal charges against J.S.
State vs. A.B.
In the early morning hours of a cold wintry day, A.B. was in her vehicle, engaged in an intimate moment with her significant other. Police approached the vehicle due to a noise complaint. When the officers knocked on the driver’s side window, A.B.’s boyfriend rolled over to the passenger seat, leaving A.B. in the driver’s seat. Ultimately A.B. was arrested for being in physical control of a motor vehicle with a BAC > .16. Avery Appelman represented A.B. and argued that she never exercised physical control over the motor vehicle. The Judge agreed and reinstated A.B.’s driving privileges. The criminal case was resolved in a manner that left no permanent record of the incident.
S.C. vs. Commissioner of Public Safety
In July of 2009, S.C. was driving home after a long day and was pulled over for speeding. The arresting officer administered a variety of field sobriety tests including a PBT. S.C.’s PBT reading was 0.109. S.C. suffers from a condition known as Gastro Esophageal Reflux Disease (G.E.R.D.), a medical condition that causes persistent reflux or regurgitation of stomach contents up into the esophagus and into the mouth. Avery Appelman proved that at the time of the breath test, S.C. was experiencing a G.E.R.D. episode which contaminated the Intoxilyzer 5000 test and resulted in an elevated blood alcohol concentration level. The Hennepin County District Court Judge presiding over the hearing concluded that S.C.’s breath test was inaccurate and unreliable due to the presence of mouth alcohol. As a result, S.C. had her driver’s license reinstated.
State vs. J.W.
Obstruction of Legal Process Offense
J.W. was a passenger in a car driven by a person with a revoked driver’s license. A police officer observed the car speeding and pursued. When the police officer finally located the vehicle, it was parked in a driveway, with the ignition off, and J.W. sitting in the front passenger seat. The officer approached and demanded that J.W. speak with him. J.W. was on the phone with a friend who was able to overhear J.W.’s entire conversation with the officer. J.W. refused to disconnect the phone call and refused to identify the driver of the vehicle. The officer became frustrated and ultimately pulled J.W. from the vehicle and arrested her for Obstruction of Legal Process with Force, claiming that J.W. stood up, presented a defiant stance, and refused the officer’s commands. Avery Appelman was retained to represent J.W. the morning of her arrest. He was able to secure her immediate release on bail that Sunday morning, and he immediately went to work. Using the statement he obtained from J.W.’s friend who overheard her conversation with the police, Mr. Appelman was able to convince the prosecution that the officer was embellishing his story (i.e. lying) and the prosecutor dismissed the case.
State vs. J.A.
Avery’s client (J.A.) was arrested for DUI after an officer witnessed the client driving erratically. The arresting officer administered field sobriety tests, which J.A. failed. J.A.’s BAC level was over .16 (double the legal limit of .08). Avery took on the case and negotiated the charges down to a misdemeanor offense. As a result, the client was not sentenced to any jail time.
State vs. C.W.
DWI – Vehicle Forfeiture
The client was charged with a DWI – her second such offense. Additionally, her BAC level was over .16 (an aggravating factor that automatically elevates the level of the charge). On the criminal case, she ended up simply doing some home monitoring, but the victory came in the vehicle forfeiture. Upon her arrest, police impounded her vehicle but decided not to seize it for forfeiture because she gave a blood test, and they would not have the results of the test for weeks. While police were waiting on the test results, the client’s dad paid off the loan owed on the vehicle, and the client signed the title over to her dad. Shortly thereafter, Eagan police served both with a notice of intent to forfeit the vehicle because the blood alcohol test came back over .16. After a year of litigation, the Honorable Timothy J. McManus deemed the seizure of the vehicle unlawful. The court found that in a forfeiture action, the city must either seize the car incident to a lawful arrest or use judicial process (a warrant) to seize the vehicle at a later date. The city had done neither, it had simply served an administrative seizure notice on the defendant and also placed an administrative hold on the vehicle with DPS – without getting a Judge’s order first.
State vs. S.C.
2nd Degree DUI
S.C. was pursued by police for 15 miles before pulling him over for suspicion of drunk driving. Police arrested him for DWI after he failed field sobriety tests. He blew over .08 BAC and was charged with a 2nd degree gross misdemeanor DUI. S.C. was facing the forfeiture of his car as well as 90 days in jail. Avery used the squad video of the stop and convinced the court to reinstate his driver’s license. S.C. ultimately plead guilty to careless driving – a misdemeanor offense.
State vs. C.P.
Avery’s client, C.P., was arrested for prostitution in a police sting targeting a specific agency. C.P. stated that before she was arrested, the undercover police officer allowed her to perform a sex act. Avery took this information and filed a motion to dismiss as the police officer’s actions clearly constituted a violation of Due Process. The State then dismissed the case.
State vs. J.V.
J.V. was pulled over and arrested for DUI under suspicious circumstances. After being hired, Stacy Kaye investigated the case and discovered that the arresting officer had no reasonable suspicion upon which to base his arrest. Stacy moved that the court suppress all evidence in the case based on this lack of reasonable suspicion. Stacy was successful, and all charges against J.V. were dismissed.
State vs. C.K.
C.K. was in serious trouble, facing charges for the sale of marijuana in close proximity to a gun. Stacy Kaye litigated the case brilliantly, arguing that the gun was not the defendant’s and that it was not used in the drug activity. As a result, the charges were dropped to simple marijuana possession. Stacy also secured a stay of adjudication of C.K. This means that if he completes his probation and community service, the arrest and charge will be expunged from his record.