An Appellate Attorney who has consistently achieved results for his clients.
United States Supreme Court:
Crosby v. United States 506 U.S. 255 (1993) (Overruling numerous federal circuit court precedents that had allowed defendants who left before trial to be tried in absentia, and granting Crosby a new trial).
Warsame v. Minnesota 548 U.S. 924 (2006) (Vacating Minnesota Court of Appeals decision affirming Warsame’s conviction for assault, granting his petition for a writ of certiorari, and remanding for further consideration).
Minnesota Supreme Court and Minnesota Court of Appeals:
State v. Jones, 869 N.W.2d 24 (Minn. 2015) (The Minnesota Supreme Court rejected County Attorney’s practice to charge persons who allegedly violated their probation with contempt of court, in addition to seeking revocation of probation and charging the conduct underlying the probation violation as a new offense).
United States v. Petruk, 781 F.3d 438 (8th Cir. Court of Appeals) (Reversing Petruk’s conviction for carjacking because the Government failed to prove that he took the car and simultaneously used force to take it).
Welfare of J.D.L., 2015 WL 1014079 (Minn. App. March 9, 2015) (The Minnesota Court of Appeals denied the State’s pre-trial appeal of the District Court’s ruling that the State lacked probable cause to charge J.D.L. with attempted murder).
- State v. Sahr, 812 N.W.2d 83 (Minn. 2012) (Rejecting the State’s appeal of Sahr’s acquittal, which the trial judge had entered after the State was unable at trial to prove the charged criminal sexual conduct offense, and reversing the Minnesota Court of Appeals’s decision that the trial judge had only declared a mistrial. On Feb. 25, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court denied the State’s request for review (2013 WL 656181).
- State v. Barsness, 795 N.W.2d 877 (Minn. App. 2011) (Reversing Barsness’s conviction because no statute or rule made it a crime to do the acts charged).
- State v. Gauster, 752 N.W.2d 496 (Minn. 2008) (Reversing the MN Court of Appeals and holding unconstitutional the inventory search of the defendant’s vehicle and affirming order suppressing evidence).
- State v. Jordan, 742 N.W.2d 149 (Minn. 2008) (Classifying violations of nighttime-entry statute as Fourth Amendment violations, and suppressing the drug evidence seized).
- State v. Rambahal, 751 N.W.2d 84 (Minn. 2008) (Upholding defendant’s right to discovery of informant-identity).
- Deegan v. State, 711 N.W.2d 89 (Minn. 2006) (Creating a constitutional right to counsel in a defendant’s first appeal, and remanding for post-conviction proceedings).
- Angus v. State, 695 N.W.2d 109 (Minn. 2005) (Reversing first-degree murder conviction).
- OMeara v. State, 679 N.W.2d 334 (Minn. 2004) (Reducing defendant’s sentence by 30 years for Apprendi violation).
- Bernhardt v. State, 684 N.W.2d 465 (Minn. 2004) (Reversing first-degree murder conviction for insufficient evidence. This was a direct appeal and a post-conviction case).
- State v. Ray, 659 N.W.2d 736 (Minn. 2003) (Reversing first-degree murder conviction for Miranda violation and prosecutor-misconduct).
- State v. Neal, 658 N.W.2d 536 (Minn. 2003) (Reducing defendant’s upward- departure sentence by twenty years).
- Garza v. State, 632 N.W.2d 633 (Minn. 2001) (Suppressing evidence based on police-failure to knock-and-announce entry).
- Aubid v. State, 592 N.W.2d 472 (Minn. 1999) (Excluding co-defendant’s statements on confrontation grounds).
- Van Buren v. State, 556 N.W.2d 548 (Minn. 1996) (Reversing criminal-sexual conduct conviction because prosecutor used vouching-evidence).
- State v. Richardson, 514 N.W.2d 573 (Minn. App. 1994) (Granting new trial for prosecutor-misconduct).
- Hoagland v. State, 518 N.W.2d 531 (Minn. 1994) (Defendant improperly denied a direct appeal).
- State v. Blacksten, 507 N.W.2d 842 (Minn. 1993) (Upholding order dismissing case based on illegal arrest).