State v. K.N.
Diversion. Client will be placed on a few months of diversion, wherein she only needs to complete some community service and pay a small fee. The typical request to complete a class regarding shoplifting was waived due to the client’s proactive approach in addressing her underlying gambling addiction. The end result is a complete dismissal of the case and a client that is on her way to combating h
State v. Confidential
Client who was seized literally from the door of her courtroom at an omnibus hearing, and detained by INS officials for weeks thereafter, resolves her case with a no-jail-time misdemeanor, no fine, NO PROBATION… when the felony counts contemplated a significant fine, probation for up to 10 years, and almost certain deportation in this post-reality Federal Administration. An ideal outcome.
State v. K.J.
Our team at North Star was able to swing a diversion program for our client. Additionally, a bare minimum in fees and conditions during diversion were imposed. As long as the client remains law abiding, gets to keep her record clear as a result. Another great win for the North Star team.
State v. M.Y.
Continuance for Dismissal. Shoplifting (theft) case out of Anoka County. Besides an outright dismissal, this is the best possible result a client can achieve in their case. Assuming our client stays law abiding for a year, this case will be completely dismissed and stay off their record.
State v. M.K.L.
Continuance for dismissal. The City Attorney took a firm stance on the offer being a stay of adjudication – a great result that the client would have been pleased with. But, Mr. Gempeler knew a better outcome was obtainable with the proper approach. After counseling the client about ways to be proactive in a manner that could lead to a better result, Mr. Gempeler aggressively negotiated the better
U.S. v. Confidential
In two separate investigations, our clients received notices (but not quite a formal target letter) indicating they might be subject to an indictment if they were unwilling to come forward and proffer (formally answer questions about possible crimes, of their own or other people). In light of Mr. Adkins’ more than two decades of experience in these matters, North Star is uniquely positioned to ass
State v. A.M.
Diversion and dismissal. Client was charged with a workplace theft – a serious offense that would have a long-lasting negative impact on his ability to gain employment in the future. The client was not eligible for diversion, thereby facing an offer to plead guilty to the offense as charge. Do to North Star’s diligence and careful discussions with the County Attorney’s office, the client became el
State v. M.T.
Expungement granted. Client was convicted of a felony theft that was eligible for an expungement. But, due to a conviction in 2011, the Court considered whether the waiting period was satisfied based upon the ambiguous language in the statute. Mr. Gempeler’s persuasive oral argument convinced the judge that the client was eligible for an expungement. And, as always, Mr. Gempeler’s diligence and th
State v. B.S. / State v. J.B.
North Star has become literally the place to go for assistance via a furlough to inpatient dual-diagnosis treatment and therapies. Both of these clients–staring a months-long delay in custody with bail that simply could not be posted (or on hold-without-bail, worse yet), prior to trial and potential long prison sentences–received judicially-approved placement at treatment facilities that may wel
State v. M.G.
Dismissed. This matter, involving crimes of a turpitude nature (lying/cheating/stealing, the sort of stuff that could result in a person being refused a loan, employment, residential applications being tossed, trial testimony rendered worthless, etc.), was dismissed after a year-long negotiation, in light of some thoughtful and aggressive investigation by Mr. Adkins and his team, and the client wa