The innocent owner defense: What do forfeiture laws have to do with marriage? Imagine that your husband or wife is struggling with alcohol addiction. Your spouse has been sober for an encouraging length of time. But then one day you get a call. A slip; and a DWI arrest of your spouse. Now the police… Read More »Innocent Owner Defense < Forfeiture
Search Results for: forfeiture
Asset Forfeiture in Minnesota | Civil and Criminal Forfeiture Attorney Thomas Gallagher provides tips for getting your property back. So find out how. Police attempt asset forfeiture when investigating criminal cases Police commonly seize property for forfeiture in these types of criminal investigations: DWI Fleeing Police in a Motor Vehicle Prostitution Illegal Drugs Types of… Read More »Forfeiture
In short, Minnesota’s current law on asset forfeiture (government takes your money): Seizure: The government (police) can take your property at any time if suspicious to them, even if you are innocent. On a practical level, possession may turn out to be 9/10s of the law. Lack of due process: The burden is on you, not… Read More »A Greater Evil: The Moral Peril of Minnesota Asset Forfeiture Laws
Part of the work of a criminal defense lawyer is to gather factual information and then consider legal defenses that are present in those facts. Though jurisdictional defenses are relatively uncommon, we look for them. If a law, a police officer, or a prosecutor has overreached, the defense can make a motion to the judge asking that the case be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
In Minnesota, a conviction will have a level. For example, it could be a felony, gross misdemeanor, misdemeanor, or petty misdemeanor conviction.
Driving Under the Influence (DUI) charges in Minnesota require convincing proof that a person was driving, operating or in control of a motor vehicle while impaired by alcohol or another drug. An exception to the requirement of proof of impairment is Minnesota’s per se limit law, making it a crime to be driving, operating or in control of a motor vehicle within two hours of having an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more. This bright line law is easier to enforce but can unfairly implicate drivers who are not actually impaired.