When Can the Police Walk a Narcotics-Detection Dog Down the Hallway of my Apartment Building?

Police are required to have a "reasonable, articulable suspicion" of drug-related activity before they will be allowed to walk a trained narcotics-detection dog down the hallway  of your apartment building. The Minnesota Constitution protects   against unreasonable searches and seizures by the police. Evidence obtained as the result of an illegal search and seizure will be suppressed by the court and  can not be used against you at  trial. Suppression of the evidence is the price the police must pay for violating your constitutional rights. The  remedy  is designed to deter future police misconduct.

What  facts would create a reasonable, articulable suspicion of drug-related activity to support the use by  police of a narcotic-detection dog? Suspicion may be indicated by  a report of a high volume of short term traffic coming and leaving  the apartment. An observation that known drug users and drug dealers are visiting your apartment on a regular basis may create reasonable, articulable  suspicion.  A report by a citizen informant that drug paraphernalia was present in your apartment would provide a basis for conducting a dog sniff.  Knowledge by police that you were active in the use and sale of controlled substances would also be a factor. The suspicion required to use a narcotics detection dog  must be something more than a mere hunch by the police.

What happens if a narcotic-detection dog alerts to an odor of a controlled substance outside the door of my apartment? The police will draft an application for the issuance of a search warrant and submit the application and  warrant to a district court judge for approval. The warrant will allow the police to search the suspect and the apartment for evidence of controlled substances, paraphernalia, etc. A judge will review the search warrant affidavit to determine whether or not, under the totality of the circumstances, there is probable cause to believe controlled substances will be found in the apartment and on the person of the suspect.

What should you do if the police find controlled substances in your apartment during the execution of a search warrant? You will need to retain an experienced narcotics defense attorney to defend your freedom. The search warrant may be defective on the grounds that the police did not have reasonable, articulable suspicion to conduct the dog sniff used to support the issuance of the warrant. Call Minnesota criminal defense attorney Robert J. Shane for a free phone consultation at (612) 339-1024. Mr. Shane is a Minneapolis criminal defense attorney with  30 years of courtroom experience and a winning record.

Minnesota Tax Evasion Defense

Any person who willfully attempts to evade or to defeat a tax imposed by law is subject to criminal prosecution. A conviction for tax evasion under federal law is a felony offense and carries a fine of not more than $500,000.00 and imprisonment not to exceed 5 years.  

In order for the federal government to obtain a conviction for tax evasion, a prosecutor is  required  to prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt: (1) willfulness, (2) existence of a tax deficiency, and (3) an affirmative act constituting an attempt to evade or defeat payment of the tax. So what  affirmative acts are associated with  tax evasion? Some examples of tax evasion would include the following: concealing the nature, extent, and ownership of your assets by placing assets in the names of other people; dealing only in cash in order to avoid creating a financial record; maintaining no bank accounts;  falsely telling an IRS agent that you don't own any property; causing your obligations to be paid in the name of another person; failing to file tax returns; and paying creditors instead of the government.

 

The failure to file a tax return is not the same as the willful attempt to evade the payment of taxes. The willful failure to pay a tax when due is a misdemeanor offense under federal law, but the willful attempt to defeat and evade a tax is a more serious felony level offense and requires some affirmative action as mentioned in the above examples.  If you, or someone you know, has been charged in Minnesota with tax evasion, you will need an experienced criminal defense attorney to defend you freedom. Attorney Robert J. Shane has 30 years of  experience in defending the freedom of the accused. Call now for a free phone consultation at (612) 339-1024 or visit his website for more information at www.criminallawyerminnesota.com.  

Can Minor Be Forced to Take a Drug Test by the Police?

If you are a minor and are suspected of having taken a controlled substance, you have no legal obligation to submit to drug testing at the request of a police officer. The police are only interested in gathering evidence to use against you in a minor consumption criminal case.

Minnesota Arrest Warrants

What should you do if you suspect there is an outstanding warrant for your arrest? You may be able to find out if a warrant has been issued for your arrest by searching online in the county where the crime occurred. Many police and sheriff's departments across Minnesota post the names of persons who have active arrest warrants online as a service to the public

How Soon After an Arrest Do I See the Judge?

If you are arrested in Minnesota without a warrant you must be brought before a judge within 36 hours.

Driving Under the Influence of Marijuana in Minnesota

It's a crime to drive a car in Minnesota when a person is under the influence of a controlled substance. https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=169A.20. Marijuana is defined in Minnesota as a Schedule I controlled substance. The punishment for a conviction for driving under the influence of marijuana can range from county jail time to imprisonment. Charges can vary  from a 4th Degree misdemeanor DWI to   felony DWI depending on the number of prior DWI convictions or license revocations a person has within the preceding 10 years. 

 

 

Probable cause to arrest for driving under the influence of marijuana requires a police officer to have more than mere suspicion but less than the proof beyond a reasonable doubt required for a criminal conviction. What are the usual circumstances and observations  of intoxication  made by a officer when deciding whether or not to arrest a suspect? The case usually begins with an officer observing bad driving conduct such as speeding, drifting over the lane dividers, illegal turn, etc. These observations will  justifying the initial stop or "seizure" of  the car under the Constitution.The officer then approaches the car and questions the driver attempting to gain an admission that he or she violated the traffic laws. Any admission made by the driver will be included in a traffic report and used in court to prove the legality of the car stop. Next, an officer who has presumably been trained in narcotics detection  will notice symptoms typically displayed by a person who is driving under the influence of controlled substance. The symptoms of intoxication can include watery and  glassy eyes, fidgety and anxious behavior, sweating and dilated pupils. The observation of these symptoms will justify the officer in requesting that the suspect exit the vehicle and perform field sobriety tests in order to determine intoxication. These tests can include a preliminary breath test to eliminate the possibility of alcohol followed by an eye-convergence test to show that your eyes react slowly to light. Police also look for an elevated pulse and body and eyelid tremors to justify an arrest. The officer will use his training and experience combined with a suspect's demeanor, driving conduct, and physical condition in order to establish probable cause for an arrest.

 

If you or someone you know has been arrested for driving while under the influence of marijuana or any other  controlled substance, you will need to hire an experienced Minneapolis criminal defense attorney to protect your freedom and reputation. Attorney Robert J. Shane has 30 years of criminal defense experience. Call now for a free phone consultation at (612) 339-1024 or visit my website for "The Best Defense" at www.criminallawyerminnesota.com.

The Law of No-Knock Search Warrants in Minnesota

The police may obtain and execute a no-knock search warrant in Minnesota when they have reason to believe that the evidence inside a home or business may be destroyed if advance warning of the police entry was given to the occupants. A no-knock warrant may also be justified in a situation where the circumstances present a threat of physical violence to the officers. Police are required to make a preliminary showing to a magistrate in a search warrant affidavit of  suporting facts that would justify the issuance of a no-knock warrant. The standard used by the Court when reviewing an application for a no-knock warrant is whether or not the facts alleged create a "reasonable suspicion" that knocking and announcing the presence of the police would create a danger to the officers, be futile, or allow the occcupants time to destroy  evidence once alerted to the presence of the police.

A preliminary showing of threats to the officers can be made by including in the search warrant application a reference to the criminal record of  the occupants for arrests or convictions for violent crimes. An arrest or conviction for an assault, dangerous weapon, or carrying weapons without a permit would all be examples of conduct that could present a threat of physical violence to the officer.

A preliminary showing in a search warrant affidavit of the liklihood of the destruction of the evidence could include an allegation that the occupants have a history of  destroying  evidence during the execution of prior search warrants.    

The Fouirth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures." If the search warrant lacks sufficient grounds for the issuance of a no-knock warrant, an experienced  Minneapolis criminal defense attorney would file a motion to suppress the use of the evidence obtained as a result of the illegal search. If the Court grants a motion to suppress the use of the evidence at trial, the criminal case will be dismissed for lack of probable cause to believe a crime was committed.

If you or someone you know has been charged with a crime that involves evidence seized as a result of the execution of a no-knock search warrant, call Robert J. Shane for a free phone consultation. Mr. Shane has 30 years of criminal defense experience and will examine the facts of your case to determine if the evidence against you was obtained in violation of your constitutional rights. Call Mr. Shane now at (612) 339-1024 or visit his website for more information at www.criminallawyerminnesota.com. 

Self-Defense and the Duty to Retreat in MN

Was the self-defense claim doomed in the  Clifford case when he failed to retreat  to avoid the conflict with Vander Lee? The  best defense  for Sgt. Clifford  would have been  to simply walk  away and put an end to  the conflict.  

Minnesota law  authorizes the use  of a reasonable amount of force to resist  "an offense against the person." See https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=609.06. The defense  has the burden at trial of coming forward with sufficient evidence to make self-defense an issue in the case. Once met, the burden  shifts to the prosecution to negate one of the following four elements of any self-defense claim: (1) an absence of aggression or provocation; (2) an actual and honest belief that imminent death or great bodily harm would result; (3) a reasonable basis existed for this belief; and (4) an absence of reasonable means to retreat or otherwise avoid the physical conflict.

 

A person can only assert a self-defense in an assault case   when  there is no alternative to the use of force. In other words, if Clifford had an opportunity to retreat from the confrontation  and failed to do so, the punch landed to the head of Vander Lee is not  considered self-defense. Did Clifford have the opportunity to retreat? It would seem so. The confrontation occurred in a public place with plenty of room to retreat. The victim was obviously intoxicated and   posed no real threat.  The defendant was a trained SWAT team leader with lightening quick  reflexes.  Sgt. Clifford could have easily taken one step backward and walked away the moment Vander Lee allegedly cocked his arm and readied his punch. The law always favors a peaceful resolution to conflicts over a  violent reaction. 

The Right To Refuse Probation in a Minnesota Criminal Case

Does a defendant  have the right to refuse probation? The answer is yes.   Often times the conditions of probation are more onerous to the defendant then serving out a jail or prison sentence. For example,  in a felony drug case a judge may sentence a defendant to 6 months in jail but decide to stay the execution of the jail sentence and place him on probation for  5 years. The judge has the authority to place conditions on the stayed jail sentence which could include random urinalysis, weekly meetings with a probation officer,  outpatient treatment, and   aftercare. A defendant may decide that he would rather serve six months in jail and compete his sentence rather than spending   5 years  fulfilling the conditions of his probation.

 

How do you execute a jail or prison  sentence in a Minnesota criminal case? You will need to retain an experienced Minnesota criminal defense attorney to enforce your right to refuse probation. The attorney will want to review your case file and advise you regarding  the advantages and disadvantages to executing the sentence. For example, the execution of the sentence could result in a permanent felony conviction rather than a misdemeanor conviction after the sucdessful completion of probation. You will need a criminal lawyer to schedule a hearing before the sentencing judge, argue the case, and  draft the appropriate motion, affidavit and proposed order.

 

If you are interested in exercising your right to refuse probation, call Minneapolis criminal defense attorney Robert J. Shane for a free phone consultation at (612) 339-1024 or visit his website for more criminal defense tips and techniques at www.criminallawyerminnesota.com. Attorney Shane has a winning record and has been defending the freedom of the accused for the past 30 years.

Marijuana in a Motor Vehicle Minnesota Law

What are the penalties in Minnesota for transporting marijuana in a motor vehicle? The answer depends on the weight of the marijuana and its location. If the police find a "small amount of marijuana" in the trunk of your car, the offense is only a petty misdemeanor subject to a fine of up to $300.00 and no jail time. A small amount of marijuana is defined as 42.5 grams or less. See https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=152.01. A petty misdemeanor offense is not considered a crime in Minnesota.

What if the police find marijuana in the passenger compartment of your car? The penalties will increase depending on the weight. If the police find 1.4 grams or less of marijuana in the passenger compartment, it's only a petty misdemeanor offense. See https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=152.027 If the weight of the marijuana is more than 1.4 grams but less than 42.6 grams, you can be charged with a more serious misdemeanor offense for possessing marijuana in a motor vehicle. The penalties for a misdemeanor conviction in Minnesota are a jail sentence of 0 and 90 days and/or a fine of up to $1,000.00.

What are the penalties if the marijuana found by the police weighs more than 42.5 grams? Again, the penalties increase because of the weight. You can now be charged with the felony level offense of controlled substance crime in the fifth degree. See https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=152.025. If the weight of the marijuana found by police exceeds 42.5 grams, the location of the marijuana in your car no longer matters.

The drug law in Minnesota does not punish you as harshly when marijuana is transported in the trunk of your car and weights less than 42.5 grams. In fact, it's not even a crime.

If the police find marijuana in your car, do you still have a defense? Yes, depending on the circumstances of your case. The stop of your car by the police may have been illegal. The search of your car by the police may have been illegal. You may be eligible for a drug diversion program. If you or someone you know has been charged with marijuana in a motor vehicle, you will need the "Best Defense." Call Minneapolis criminal defense attorney Robert J. Shane for a free phone consultation at (612) 339-1024 or read his blog for more tips and defenses at www.criminallawyerminnesota.com.