State v. H.P.
Careless Driving. Client had no defense. She was dead to rights and with a reading at a .11, things were not looking great to get a non-DWI outcome. But, the North Star team helped guide her on certain proactive steps she could take to gain negotiating leverage. And thanks to a fantastic relationship with the prosecuting attorney, the unobtainable became obtainable and the client was able to get a
State v. L.V.
Plea to an amended count of failing to drive with due care. In addition to pleading to such a low criminal charge and avoiding the DWI, the client was placed on probation to the court, and had no time to serve and a minimal fine. Without a true defense, but compelling underlying facts, the North Star team leveraged a pending trial, some proactive steps by the client, and its good relationship with
State v. A.K.
Plea to an amended count of Failing to Drive with Due Care. The client had zero record and was concerned how a DWI-related outcome (even a Careless Driving) could impact her future. Despite no meaningful legal defense to the case, the North Star team was able to negotiate this fantastic result due to a smart strategy, leveraging the criminal process, and positioning the client in the best position
State v. M.E.
Stay of Adjudication to one count of a misdemeanor DWI. The client received this remarkable outcome after the North Star team was able to demonstrate to the prosecutor how a plea would critically impact her professional and personal life. The client would’ve lost her job, even with a Careless Driving, and been prevented from traveling to Canada to see her significant other. Proactive steps demonst
State v. T.U.
Plea to an amended count of Careless Driving. This was a fantastic result considering the client blew a .12 and we didn’t have any defense. Undeterred, Mr. Gempeler counseled the client on what information he needed to make a persuasive plea negotiation that the prosecutor bought and agreed to such a rare outcome.
State v. J.Y.
Plea to a careless driving misdemeanor offense. The client was a first-time offender with a high .11 reading (i.e. the average between his two tests were above .12). Plus, the client was underage. Despite this, the North Star team knew it could achieve a non-DWI with the right approach. The St. Paul city attorney balked at first, noting that they usually don’t offer Careless Driving’s to such a hi
State v. A.B.
Stay of Imposition. Client blew a .19 and got into an accident. She admitted to being drunk when stopped by police. By all accounts, the client had no legal defenses. Yet, with a strong plan of attack, the North Star team achieved this rare outcome on her behalf – OVER the State’s objection. In a local city that is known for being tough on clients with high readings, Mr. Gempeler made a compelling
State v. N.A.
Stay of Adjudication – which means the case will be dismissed, without a conviction, after a brief probationary period. This is such an incredibly rare outcome. And, on top of the outcome itself, the terms and conditions of probation are exactly in line with a standard first-time offense – i.e. the client does not have to do anything above and beyond to get this incredible outcome. Instead, due to
State v. F.G.
Plea to an amended count of Careless Driving. The sentence called for no jail time, minimal fine, and a year of probation with only the bare minimum terms of probation for a DWI-related offense. This is a fantastic result, considering the fact that the client had a prior DWI just outside of ten years. Usually, with a prior DWI, prosecutors are not want to give the benefit of the doubt to the Defen
State v. B.D.
Plea to a misdemeanor SPEEDING ticket. The sentence only called for a standard two days of community work service, a minimal fine, and he is on unsupervised probation. Getting this incredible result – out of Minneapolis, no less – was imperative for a client that conducts significant business in Canada. Now, with this outcome, the client’s job is no longer in jeopardy.