Minneapolis Assault Lawyer & Minnesota Assault Attorney2020-07-08T04:57:40+00:00

Types of Assault and Related Types of Cases

Arson
Assault
Domestic Assault
Assault with a Dangerous Weapon
Burglary/Robbery
Disorderly Conduct
Domestic Assault
Domestic Assault by Strangulation
False Imprisonment

Felony Assault
Harassment
Kidnapping
Murder/Manslaughter
Stalking
Terroristic Threats
Threats of Violence
911 Interference

Minneapolis Assault Defense AttorneyAssault charges in Minnesota and related types of cases

In Minnesota, an assault is defined as the intentional infliction of bodily harm, the attempted infliction of bodily harm, or, doing an act with intent to cause fear in another of immediate bodily harm or death.

In Minnesota, an assault charge can be generally classified into one of five different levels as follows:

  • First Degree Assault – Felony (infliction of great bodily harm)
  • Second Degree Assault – Felony (assault with dangerous weapon)
  • Third Degree Assault – Felony (infliction of substantial bodily harm, such as a broken bone)
  • Fourth Degree Assault – Felony (assault against a police officer)
  • Fifth Degree Assault – Misdemeanor (infliction of bodily harm)

More specifically, in legal terms, an assault is defined as the intentional infliction of bodily harm upon another, the attempted infliction of bodily harm upon another, or intentionally causing fear in another of immediate bodily injury or death.

A first degree felony assault usually involves the infliction of great bodily harm, which colloquially means life threatening injuries.

A second degree felony assault usually means an assault with a dangerous weapon, which could include a firearm, knife, or a motor vehicle.

A third degree felony assault usually means the infliction of substantial bodily harm, which usually means a broken bone or a broken tooth.

A fourth degree assault usually involves an assault against a police officer, or a corrections officer, or one that involves bias.

A fifth (5th) degree misdemeanor assault usually involves some sort of bar fight, resulting in bruising.

In  summary, an assault with minor injuries and without the involvement of a weapon is usually a simple assault, or a 5th degree misdemeanor assault.  If a weapon is involved in an attack, or if the assault resulted in serious injury for the victim, then it is likely to be categorized as a felony assault.

Misdemeanor domestic assault

It is worth noting that even a misdemeanor domestic assault can have very serious consequences.  A misdemeanor domestic assault is a regular assault generally speaking, against a romantic partner or family member.   A conviction of a misdemeanor domestic assault under Minnesota law has a maximum penalty of up to 90 days in jail and  $1000.00 fine, with a three (3) year ban on possession of firearms.  However, under federal law, this is categorized as a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, and may cause a lifetime ban on the possession of firearms.  A couple of exceptions include the fear prong (no lifetime ban), or, an assault against a sister (no lifetime ban).  Thus, generally, a conviction of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence may preclude possession of firearms, hunting, as well as careers in the military and law enforcement.  Thus, it is very important to get a lawyer as soon as possible when charged with any type of assault.

WCCO TV features Expert Minneapolis Criminal Defense Attorney Lynne Torgerson in Jake Patterson Murder and Kidnapping Case

Minneapolis Criminal Defense Attorney Lynne Torgerson, was interviewed by WCCO TV in regard to the Jake Patterson case.  Ms. Torgerson, who had read the criminal complaint outlining the evidence that led to the charges against Patterson, was convinced the case would not go to trial.

“This is a very unique case and there is no defense. The facts are pretty horrific,” Torgerson said.

She has no affiliation with the case, but her experience leads her to believe Patterson and his team will enter a not guilty plea Wednesday, despite the fact that the 21 year old admitted to police how he abducted Closs from her home.

Jake Patterson during a February court appearance (credit: CBS)

“There’s just a certain life to a case, and if the arraignment is extremely early, it would probably be irresponsible to allow your client to resolve it at that date, especially in a case this serious,” Torgerson said. “But ultimately it’s [Patterson’s] decision.”

Read Full Article

Minnesota Criminal Defense Attorney Lynne Torgerson obtains elimination of 2nd degree felony assault charge

Ms. Torgerson’s client was charged with felony 2nd degree assault with a dangerous weapon, a firearm.  It was alleged that the defendant had pointed a handgun at a neighbor, who called the police.  After lengthy proceedings, Ms. Torgerson obtained the elimination of the felony 2nd degree assault charge, whereby the case was reduced to a gross misdemeanor with a sentence of no jail time.  Well done Ms. Torgerson!

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson obtains dismissal of domestic assault

Minnesota Criminal Defense Attorney Lynne Torgerson obtained a dismissal of a domestic assault.  Initially, Ms. Torgerson’s client was charged with domestic assault, out of the City of New Brighton, County of Ramsey, State of Minnesota.  The charge was eventually amended to a disorderly conduct, and, then ultimately the domestic assault and disorderly conduct charges were ultimately and entirely dismissed.  Well done Ms. Torgerson.

Assault Attorney Lynne Torgerson obtains dismissal of domestic assault, amendment to disorderly conduct with a stay of adjudication

Criminal Defense Attorney Lynne Torgerson represented a client charged with 5th degree domestic assault out of the City of Minneapolis, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota.  The domestic assault charge was dismissed, amended to a disorderly conduct, with a stay of adjudication, whereby the client is not convicted of anything, and, in 1 year, the case will be dismissed, presuming the client successfully completes probation.  There was also no DANCO and no no contact order.  Excellent result Ms. Torgerson!

Attorney Lynne Torgerson obtains 11th hour dismissal of felony aggravated robbery case

Criminal defense lawyer, Lynne Torgerson, Esq., recently won a dismissal of a felony aggravated robbery charge out of Hennepin County.  Her client was charged with aggravated robbery, which alleges the commission of a robbery using a firearm.  The potential sentence was 86 months in prison.  The case went through the arraignment, contested omnibus hearing, and the scheduling of a jury trial.  Witnesses had to be subpoenaed and they showed up at the trial.  Identity was an issue, and at the last minute, the complaining witness got wobbly.  Thus resulting in a dismissal!  A thank you also goes out to the prosecuting attorney for her integrity.  Good work Ms. Torgerson!

Minnesota Assault Lawyer Lynne Torgerson lawyer wins felony assault charge, gross misdemeanor harassment charge, and misdemeanor disorderly conduct

Criminal Defense Attorney Lynne Torgerson’s client was charged with 3rd degree felony assault, gross misdemeanor harassment, and misdemeanor disorderly conduct. In a rare occurrence, the case went to a jury trial.  Ending in great success, her client was found not guilty of 3rd degree felony assault, the gross misdemeanor harassment count was dismissed. Excellent result for her client.  A felony assault conviction can be devastating to one’s life, career, and future.

Minneapolis Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson obtains dismissal of felony threats of violence charge in Ramsey County

Lynne Torgerson, Criminal Defense Attorney, obtained a dismissal of a felony threats of violence case in Ramsey County on behalf of her client.  It was alleged that her client stabbed her husband in his shoulder with a knife.  Just short of appearing for a jury trial, the State dismissed the charges in the interest of justice.

Terroristic threats lawyer Lynne Torgerson wins threats of violence case

Ms. Torgerson’s client, a young man 19 years old, was charged with felony terroristic threats (the name of this charge has more recently been changed to “threats of violence”), out of Hennepin County.  He was charged because he used a motor vehicle, rather nobly (although misguidedly), essentially to defend the honor of his mother.  Very fortunately, Ms. Torgerson was able to work out a resolution whereby the felony would be dismissed, and her client would only be convicted of misdemeanor reckless driving.  This helped protect her client’s record, keeping a felony off of his record, and thus protecting her client future and future employment opportunities.  Good work Ms. Torgerson!

Minnesota Assault Lawyer Lynne Torgerson wins dismissals of 5th degree assault and disorderly conduct

In a case out of the City of Plymouth, County of Hennepin, assault lawyer Lynne Torgerson obtains dismissals of both the fifth degree assault charge and the disorderly conduct charge against her client.  This resulted in all charges in the case being dismissed against her client.

Minneapolis Criminal Defense Attorney Lynne Torgerson wins harassment restraining order case at the Minnesota Court of Appeal

Lynne Torgerson, Esq., Harassment Restraining Order Lawyer, has won another case at the Minnesota Court of Appeals.  She won another case, a harassment restraining order case, at the Minnesota Court of Appeals.  Attorney Lynne Torgerson has excellent legal research and writing skills, as well as appellate oral argument skills, as evidenced by her repeated wins at the Minnesota Court of Appeals.  At the trial court level, Ms. Torgerson’s client had obtained a restraining order against his ex-girlfriend.  The facts showed that she had harassed him at work and in the community.  The ex-girlfriend appealed.  On appeal, Ms. Torgerson’s client again prevailed.  Excellent result Lynne Torgerson!

Minnesota Assault Lawyer Lynne Torgerson wins stay of adjudication in domestic assault and 911 interference case

Ms. Torgerson’s client was charged with misdemeanor domestic assault out of Carver County, State of Minnesota, whereby client was facing up to 90 days in jail and life long loss of rights to possess firearms.  Ms. Torgerson successfully obtained an amendment to 911 interference, with a Stay of Adjudication and no executed jail time, whereby the case will be dismissed in one (1) year, with no conviction, and no loss of gun rights.  Excellent result!

Minnesota Domestic Assault Lawyer Lynne Torgerson wins elimination of domestic assault charge

Domestic Assault Attorney Lynne Torgerson has obtained an elimination of a domestic assault charge.  The charge of domestic assault, out of the City of Minneapolis, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, was amended to a disorderly conduct, with a stay of imposition of sentence, to be vacated and dismissed in one (1) year.  This means that presuming her client does not violate probation for one (1) year, the disorderly conduct conviction will be vacated, and the charge dismissed in one (1) year.  Thus, he will no longer have any conviction.  Additionally, the DANCO was dismissed.

Minnesota Assault Defense Attorney Lynne Torgerson, Esq. obtains success in misdemeanor assault and disorderly conduct case

Lynne Torgerson, Esq., Criminal Defense Lawyer, had great success in the following assault and disorderly conduct case.  Initially, her client was charged with assault and disorderly conduct.  It involved problems with security, or, the bouncer, at a bar.  In handling her client’s case, Ms. Torgerson, Esq. obtained a continuance for dismissal for all charges in the case.  This means there was no plea of guilty, no admission of wrongdoing, and no conviction.  This keeps a person’s record clean, as well as keeping them out of jail, and thus helps them with future employment and career opportunities.  Then, eventually, the case was dismissed.  This is so important for young adults.  Criminal convictions can cause employment problems for people throughout their lives.  Ms. Torgerson works to keep criminal convictions off of her clients’ records.  This is particularly important where a person is charged with misdemeanor assault, domestic assault, disorderly conduct, obstructing legal process, violation of an order for protection, violation of a harassment restraining order, interference with a 911 call, etc.  She understands the importance of protecting her clients’ future.  Excellent successful result for Ms. Torgerson’s client.

Later, after the case was dismissed, because there was no conviction in her client’s case, her client petitioned for expungement of her criminal records, such as the police reports, court records, etc., and, the expungement was granted.  This resulted in a complete victory for her client.  This means that there is nothing on her client’s record, thus protecting her client’s future employment opportunities and career.  Excellent work Ms. Torgerson!

911 INTERFERENCE

Minnesota Criminal Defense Attorney Lynne Torgerson obtains dismissal of 911 interference case

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson successfully obtained the dismissal of a charge of gross misdemeanor 911 interference out of the County of Carver, State of Minnesota.  Ms. Torgerson’s client was a young man, married, with children.  After a party at the couple’s home, a suspicion of infidelity arose, with a subsequent altercation.  Initially, the case was resolved pursuant to an amendment from a charge of domestic assault to a Stay of Adjudication on a 911 interference charge.  After successful completion of probation, the case has now been dismissed.  Well done Ms. Torgerson.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson obtains dismissal of obstruction of legal process

Minnesota Criminal Defense Attorney Lynne Torgerson obtains dismissal of gross misdemeanor obstruction of legal process out of the County of Dakota, State of Minnesota.  Ms. Torgerson’s client, a young man, was charged with gross misdemeanor obstruction of legal process and misdemeanor trespass, out of the City of Eagan.  Fortunately, the gross misdemeanor obstruction of legal process charge was dismissed, and the trespass was reduced to a petty misdemeanor.  In Minnesota, a petty misdemeanor is not a crime, and, only a fine may be imposed.  Well done Ms. Torgerson.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Attorney Lynne Torgerson won a not guilty verdict in a domestic assault jury trial

Minneapolis Criminal Defense Attorney Lynne Torgerson won a not guilty verdict in a domestic assault jury trial in the County of Jackson, Fifth Judicial District, State of Minnesota.  Ms. Torgerson’s client was charged with misdemeanor domestic assault in Jackson County, State of Minnesota.  The case was tried to a jury.  An eyewitness to the crime testified that he did not recognize anyone in the courtroom, including Ms. Torgerson’s client, as the perpetrator.  In a one (1) day trial, the jury found the defendant not guilty.  Well done Ms. Torgerson.

Definition of 3rd degree felony assault

Third degree felony assault is a charge where the facts usually involve a broken bone, or, what the statute defines as “substantial bodily harm.”

Harassment definition

Harassment is a charge where the facts allege repeated unwanted contact or unwelcome words.

Disorderly conduct definition and law

A disorderly conduct charge is a lower level misdemeanor. The statute talks about words and/or conduct that reasonably tend to arouse anger, alarm, or resentment in others.  A little known legal rule is that case law has held that “others” means that more than more other person must be involved, must be present.  That means that if you are arguing with someone, and there is no one else around, that there are only two (2) of you, as a matter of law, you cannot be convicted of disorderly conduct.

Minnesota Aggravated Assault Lawyer

An aggravated assault usually involves a deadly weapon such as a knife or a gun and is a graver crime. Even in the absence of a weapon, if the assault included a threat to kill, rob or rape, then it is considered as an aggravated assault. And, if you are being investigated, it is highly recommended that one does not get overwhelmed by the actions and efforts of the investigating officer by giving a statement. Rather, you need to invoke your rights to silence and to counsel. This can be simply and politely done by saying “I don’t want to talk, and, I want a lawyer.” Further, you should never consent to a search of you, or your, or your car. While you cannot do anything to stop a search in progress, you never need to give your consent. And, you should not do so. Overall, it is best to seek the services of a professional Minnesota aggravated assault attorney at the earliest, as a qualified and confident attorney can help you with the situation and explain the prosecution’s requirements to prove guilt.

Minnesota Domestic Assault Lawyer

Domestic assault cases involve a higher level of legal complexity and are often associated with extreme emotions and sentiments. If you have been charged with domestic violence, then it is essential that you hire the services of an experienced Minnesota domestic assault attorney, who can provide you with skilled representation and at the same time can understand painful emotions associated with the case. Ms. Torgerson has had great success in the area of domestic assault charges.

Sexual Assault Defense Attorney

A sexual assault charge is one of the most serious crimes one can be accused of during a lifetime. However, once charged with a sexual assault, it is not very easy to come clean out of the legal system and you need an experienced and knowledgeable Minnesota sexual attorney to defend you. Lynne Torgerson is known for strong, effective representation of her clients. It has been said that she leaves no stone unturned to ensure that all her client’s rights and interests are protected to the maximum. If you or any of your loved ones are going through the nightmare of an assault charge, contact the Law Office of Lynne Torgerson as soon as possible. An early consultation can make a huge difference to your case. DO NOT DELAY, CALL NOW!

CASE LAW UPATE:  It was error for the trial court to fail to give accomplice testimony jury instruction in 1st degree aggravated robbery jury trial  

In this direct appeal from a conviction of aiding 1st degree aggravated robbery, defendant argued that the trial court plainly erred by failing to sua sponte give an accomplice testimony jury instruction.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals agreed that the trial court plainly erred in failing to provide the jury the accomplice testimony instruction, but concluded that this plain error did not affect defendant’s substantial rights, as there was not a reasonable likelihood that the jury’s verdict would have changed had the trial court given an accomplice corroboration instruction to the jury.  Affirmed.

State v. Jones, A18-1836, Hennepin County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Although one person show up was unnecessarily suggestive, it was sufficiently reliable to be admitted 

After the victim of a robbery identified defendant as one of the men who robbed him, defendant was charged with the offense.  Before trial, defendant sought to exclude evidence of the out of court identification.  The trial court admitted the evidence, ruling that, while the identification procedure was unnecessarily suggestive, the victim’s identification was reliable.  After a jury trial, defendant was convicted of first degree aggravated robbery.  He appealed, arguing (1) that the trial court erred by admitting the identification evidence and (2) that, even if the evidence was admissible, it was insufficient as a matter of law to prove his identity as the perpetrator beyond a reasonable doubt.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals agreed that the one person show up identification procedure was unnecessarily suggestive, but nevertheless concluded that the identification of defendant was sufficiently reliable to be admitted, and the trial court did not err by admitting it.  Affirmed.

State v. Baker, A18-1417, Hennepin County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Right of confrontation re valuation of damage to property in 1st degree felony damage to property trial 

After smashing the front and rear windshields of her ex-boyfriend’s car with a landscaping brick, defendant was convicted of 1st degree damage to property.  Defendant challenged her conviction on the grounds that a written vehicle repair estimate, as the primary evidence of the value of property damage, was inadmissible without the testimony of the person who prepared it.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that the trial court erred by admitting the vehicle repair estimate without testimony from the individual who prepared it, but that defendant’s substantial rights were not affected by the admission of the repair estimate.  Affirmed.

State v. Coleman, A18-1525, Hennepin County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  The Minnesota Court of Appeals held evidence sufficient to uphold defendant’s convictions of felony domestic assault by strangulation and misdemeanor domestic assault  

Defendant challenged his convictions for misdemeanor domestic assault harm, misdemeanor domestic assault fear, and felony domestic assault by strangulation.  Defendant argued that the evidence introduced at trial was insufficient to support the three convictions.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that the victim’s testimony alone was sufficient to support the convictions.  Affirmed.

State v. Palmer, A18-1603, Hennepin County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Police officer opinion testimony on aggressor in 5th degree assault case  

Defendant challenged his convictions of 5th degree assault and disorderly conduct.  He argued that the trial court committed plain error by allowing 2 officers to testify as to their opinion that he was the aggressor in the fight, based on their viewing of a surveillance video of the fight.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that the statements that defendant was the aggressor in the fight were admissible lay opinions because they were rationally based on the officers’ perceptions, helpful to a clear understanding of the testimony, and not based on specialized knowledge.  Affirmed.

State v. Skolte, A18-2091, Otter Tail County.

Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Stalking and violation of harassment restraining order sentence 

Defendant appealed from his convictions for stalking and violation of a harassment restraining order, arguing that the trial court erred in the calculation of his criminal history score.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals agreed with defendant that the State did not meet its burden of proving that defendant’s felony convictions from California for possession of marijuana in 2003 and a 2006 misdemeanor domestic violence conviction from Michigan were properly included in the calculations.  Reversed and remanded.

State v. Banwell, A18-2124, Stearns County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Motion to withdraw plea from second degree felony assault  

Defendant brought a motion to withdraw his plea to second degree felony assault.  On appeal, defendant argued that he did not admit to intending to cause fear, a key element of the offense.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that the record provided sufficient facts to sustain his guilty plea, noting that defendant admitted during his plea that his wife was “for sure” in fear of being harmed when he shot his gun four times in the house and that the complaint alleged that defendant told his wife that he was going to shoot and kill her whole family.  Affirmed.

State v. Foley, A18-1895, Meeker County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Was the evidence sufficient in this felony domestic assault trial?

On appeal defendant argued that his conviction for felony domestic assault must be reversed because the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he harmed the victim.  Defendant’s argument was that the bruising on the victim’s face occurred between the time defendant left the house and when the deputy arrived, and was caused by an accident, self harm, or another person.  Noting that no evidence indicated that the victim was with anyone besides defendant that afternoon, the Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.  Affirmed.

State v. Norcross, A18-2052, Becker County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Sentence for domestic abuse no contact order

Defendant argued that his sentence was illegally modified after adjudication when the trial court aggregated two consecutive sentences for Domestic Abuse No Contact Order (DANCO) violations into a single sentence in violation of Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines II.F because the guidelines direct only that the commissioner or corrections to perform the aggregation.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that any error in combining the sentences into a single sentence was harmless and did not affect defendant’s substantial rights.  Affirmed.

State v. Schaefer-Bonovsky, A18-1908, Stearns County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Assault with intent to inflict serious injury is a crime of violence 

Where a defendant challenged the finding that his Iowa conviction for assault with intent to inflict serious injury qualified as a crime of violence under the career offender enhancement, the conviction qualified as a crime of violence under the force clause, so the judgment is affirmed.

United States v. Quigley, 18-3317, appealed from the Southern District of Iowa, Gruender, J.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Speedy trial not violated in 1st degree assault and attempted 2nd degree murder trial 

Defendant challenged his convictions of attempted 2nd degree murder and 1st degree assault, arguing that the trial court violated his right to a speedy trial.  Noting that defendant’s trial occurred 42 days after his speedy trial demand, the Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that the delay was not prejudicial.

State v. Ramsey, A18-2023, Ramsey County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Felony threats of violence trial in Hennepin County

Defendant appealed his conviction of felony threats of violence.  He contended the trial court abused its discretion in allowing a defendant witness to be cross examined about possible immigration consequences defendant might suffer if found guilty.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that because evidence of defendant’s immigration status was relevant to show a witness’ potential bias, the testimony’s relevance outweighed its prejudicial effect, and, the court gave a limiting instruction, the court did not abuse its discretion.  Affirmed.

State v. Gallegos-Olivera, A19-0023, Hennepin County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Indoor porch is part of building under burglary statute

Trial court denied defendant’s petition for postconviction relief.  On appeal, defendant argued that he should have been permitted to withdraw his plea of guilty to second degree burglary and stalking.  Defendant argued that his plea was not accurate because the record did not establish that he entered the victim’s porch without her consent.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that the indoor porch, for purposes of the burglary statute, was a building in which defendant would need consent to enter.  Affirmed.

Fordyce v. State, A19-0648, Crow Wing County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Defendant argued that threat of violence was immediate and not for future

Defendant was convicted of threats of violence.  On appeal, he argued that the evidence was not sufficient for a threats of violence conviction because his actions did not threaten a future crime of violence.  Defendant argued that although he threatened to kill the victim, his threat was to commit an immediate act of violence, not, as the statute requires, a threat to commit a future act of violence.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that defendant’s statements that he was “going to f—ing kill” the victim could be reasonably construed as a threat to kill the victim in the future.  Affirmed.

State v. Neitzel, A19-0180, Pine County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  A secured laundry room is part of dwelling under burglary statute

Defendant pleaded guilty to burglary.  He then brought a motion to withdraw his plea contending his plea was inaccurate on the grounds that a secured laundry room in an apartment building was not a dwelling under Minn. Stat. section 609.52, subd. 1(a).  Noting that caselaw established that areas appurtenant to a dwelling are part of the dwelling, the Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that the locked laundry room was considered a dwelling.  Affirmed.

State v. Grondahl, A19-0292, St. Louis County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Did the prosecution prove beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant did not act in self defense in 2nd degree assault case?

Defendant was convicted of 2nd degree felony assault.  On appeal, defendant argued that the evidence was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was not acting in self defense.  Noting that defendant could have left the apartment, but chose to instead retrieve a knife from the kitchen and begin swinging it at the victim, threatening to kill him, the Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that the facts did not support an actual and honest belief of imminent bodily harm.  It also concluded that defendant had to opportunity to retreat and failed to do so.  Affirmed.

State v. Burns, A19-0111, Clay County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Falsely reporting crime by a police officer 

Defendant was convicted of falsely reporting that the police officer had committed the crimes of assault and sexual assault against her.  On appeal, she argued that the trial court had erred by failing to specifically define “crime” or “criminal act” in the jury instructions.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that the general nature of assault crimes is well known to Minnesota citizens.  It therefore held that the trial court did not commit error, plain or otherwise, in its jury instructions.  Affirmed.

State v. Cerda, A19-0349, Olmsted County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Sentence for domestic assault and felony domestic assault by strangulation

Defendant was found guilty of domestic assault and felony domestic assault by strangulation.  Defendant argued that his sentence must be reversed and remanded for resentencing on the grounds that the trial court erred in calculating his criminal history score.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that the trial court improperly included an additional criminal history point for the domestic assault conviction on which he was not sentenced.  Reversed and remanded.

State v. Lopez, A19-0410, Renville County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Defendant’s 3rd degree assault conviction upheld

Defendant was convicted of 3rd degree assault in Hennepin County District court.  Defendant argued on appeal that the evidence was insufficient to establish substantial bodily harm.   The Minnesota Court of Appeals noted that there was not evidence introduced at trial to support defendant’s hypothesis that the victim had a preexisting condition.  Affirmed.

State v. Hawkins, A19-0275, Hennepin County.

Minneapolis Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Sentence for felony domestic assault and 1st degree burglary

Defendant was convicted of felony domestic assault and 1st degree burglary in the County of Stearns, State of Minnesota.  At sentencing, defendant brought a motion for a downward durational departure.  The trial court denied his motion.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals upheld the denial of a downward durational departure on the grounds that the record showed that defendant’s offense was actually more serious, not less serious, than a typical offense.

State v. Medina-Acosta, A19-0316, Stearns County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  In 5th degree misdemeanor assault trial victim allowed to testify as to facts regarding prior convictions

Defendant was convicted of 5th degree misdemeanor assault in the County of Mower, State of Minnesota.  Defendant appealed on the grounds that (1) the victim should not have been allowed to testify as to the facts of victim’s prior convictions, and (2) defendant’s cross examination of victim regarding same was limited.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals found no error, and no plain error in the State’s questioning of victim about his prior convictions, given that defendant had stated his intent to cross examine victim on same.  Affirmed.

State v. Karnes, A19-0504, Mower County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Was right to speedy trial denied in stalking trial?

Defendant was convicted by a jury trial of stalking and domestic assault.  On appeal, defendant argued that his constitutional right to a speedy trial had been violated.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that most of the delay between defendant’s arrest and trial was attributable to him, that he was amenable to two continuances, and discredited him claims of anxiety, whereby his right to a speedy trial was not violated. Affirmed.

State v. Riddle, A19-0222, Ramsey County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  What is criminal contempt of court?

Defendant was convicted of three (3) counts of criminal contempt of court in Olmsted County, State of Minnesota.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed two (2) of the three (3) convictions.  The first and only count to be upheld as criminal contempt of court was when defendant spoke directly to the trial court after instruction to remain silent.  It was not criminal contempt when defendant said that all he wanted was for the record to reflect that he would be withdrawing his guilty plea.  When the trial court stated that It was now 60 days, and defendant replied “Thank you.  That’s all I wanted to say,” this latter statement was also not contempt.  Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

State v. Link, A19-0711, Olmsted County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  A homeowner has no duty to retreat from his own home before defending himself

The law provides that a homeowner is The King of his Castle.

Defendant was convicted of felony 2nd degree assault with a dangerous weapon.  On appeal, defendant argued that the trial court committed plain error when it included a clearly erroneous jury instruction.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals held that a individual does not have a duty to retreat from his home before defending himself.  The Court then held that the trial court’s instruction that the legal excuse of self defense was only available to those who acted honestly and in good faith, including the duty to avoid the danger if reasonable possible was plainly erroneous.  However, the conviction was not reversed because the defendant’s use of force, severely beating the victim with a wooden baseball bat, was not reasonable.  Affirmed.

State v. Onuko, A19-0701, Hennepin County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  What is the amount of force needed in order to constitute simple robbery?

Pursuant to a bench trial, defendant was convicted of simple robbery.  Defendant appealed.  She argued that the evidence was insufficient to prove that her temporary use of force overcame another person’s resistance.  The Minnesota Supreme Court upheld her conviction, holding that the force element of simple robbery is satisfied the moment an actor uses force for the purpose of overcoming another’s resistance to the taking or carrying away of property, and, that the evidence was sufficient.  Affirmed.

State v. Townsend, A18-0792, Hennepin County, Minnesota Supreme Court.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Was evidence sufficient to prove animal cruelty?

Defendant was convicted of animal cruelty.  On appeal, defendant argued that the evidence was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he “engaged in” cockfighting “on or about” the date of the charged offense.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals held that, the term “engages in” under Minn. Stat. §343.31, subd. 1(a)(1) unambiguously means to participate or to be involved in or occupied with the activity of cockfighting.  Further, the statute is not limited to actually getting caught in an active cockfight to sustain a conviction of engaging in the activity of cockfighting.  Affirmed.

State v. Vang, A19-0644, Hennepin County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Discovery violations in malicious punishment of a child, neglect, and child endangerment case

Defendant was convicted of malicious punishment of a child, neglect, and child endangerment in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota.  She appealed.  On appeal, defendant contended that the prosecution violated discovery obligations by failing to disclose the audio recordings of interviews of defendant, her husband, and two daughters, given to the county social worker.  It was agreed that the failure was unintentional.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that assuming arguendo a discovery violation, the parties and Court had agreed on a remedy which cured any prejudice.  Affirmed.

State v. Yonis, A19-0655, Hennepin County.

Minneapolis Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Defendant alleges insufficient evidence to convict him of assault with a dangerous weapon

Defendant was convicted of 2nd degree felony assault with a dangerous weapon.  Defendant argued that the circumstantial evidence did not eliminate all rational inferences inconsistent with guilt — that he fired the rifle with the intent to get the attention of the intruders and scare them off his property.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that is defendant’s intent in firing a rifle in any direction was to make the trespassers afraid so they would leave his property, then the only rational inference was that he intended to cause them fear that they would be hit with a bullet if they did not leave, which is an intent to cause fear of immediate bodily harm.  Affirmed.

State v. Marczak, A19-0638, Redwood County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Excited utterance and hearsay having sufficient guarantees of trustworthiness

Defendant was convicted of domestic assault.  On appeal, defendant argued that (1) the trial court erred in admitting the complainant’s out of court statement as an excited utterance; and (2) committed plain error in admitting hearsay statements the complainant made several months after the incident.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals, (1) noting that only 3 minutes passed between the call was made and the officer to whom the utterance was made arrived at the complainant’s home, held that the statement qualified as an excited utterance; and (2) held that the defendant failed to demonstrate that the complainant’s statements to the second officer lacked sufficient guarantees of trustworthiness to as to be inadmissible under Rule 807.

State v. Rogers, A19-1133, Becker County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  The evidence was insufficient to establish 1st degree criminal damage to property

Defendant was convicted of 1st degree criminal damage to property.  On appeal, defendant challenged the sufficiency of the evidence on conviction.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed defendant’s conviction for 1st degree criminal damage to property on the grounds that the circumstantial evidence was insufficient to prove defendant intended to damage property, noting that it was a reasonable inference that he was trying to drive away quickly after an altercation and could have inadvertently damaged the property while going fast in reverse.  Conviction reversed.

State v. Magee, A18-1839, Dakota County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Defendant’s conviction of malicious punishment of child reversed because of erroneous jury instruction

Defendant was convicted of malicious punishment of a child.  He appealed.  Defendant argued that his conviction must be reversed on the grounds that the trial court omitted essential elements of aiding and abetting in jury instructions.  The trail court had instructed the jury pursuant to Minn. Stat. §609.05, subd. 1 and 2, but did not include “intentionally aided” as required by case law.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals held that this exclusion was plain error that affected defendant’ substantial rights , because the testimony was that the most severe physical punishments were inflicted by defendant’s wife.  Reversed.

State v. Kastigar, A19-0561, Hennepin County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Restitution order reversed in assault case

Defendant sprayed mace at a physician in an examination room at a hospital.  In the aftermath, the physician allegedly lost a $2000.00 pair of diamond earrings.  He pleaded guilty and was convicted of 4th degree assault of emergency medical personnel.  A restitution hearing was held.  At the hearing, the State failed to introduce any evidence.  The trial court also entered a order requiring defendant to pay $2000.00 in restitution to the physician.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals, in a rare reversal, reversed the restitution order on the grounds that the evidentiary record lacked any evidence to support the restitution award, and, the State had failed to offer any justification for its failure to introduce any evidence at the hearing.  Reversed.

State v. Chestnut, A19-0684, Hennepin County.

Minneapolis Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Single behavioral incident

Defendant was convicted of second degree assault, two counts of violating an order for protection (OFP), and three counts of violating a Domestic Abuse No Contact Order (DANCO).  Defendant argued that the second degree assault,and one OFP violation were part of the same behavioral incident.  Defendant also argued that the three DANCO violations were also a single behavioral incident.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals held that absent a single time, place and criminal objective for the second degree assault and one OFP violation, the trial court did not err in sentencing on both.  Additionally, because the three DANCO violations occurred on three different days with three different inmates being asked by defendants to contact the victim, they were not a single behavioral incident.  Affirmed.

State v. Kingsley, A19-0735, Anoka County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Whether defendant’s statements constituted the statutory definition of threats of violence?

Defendant was convicted of felony threats of violence.  Defendant made the following statements, some more than once:  (1) officers were going to die; (2) he was going to rape an officer’s daughter; (3) he was going to torture an officer; (4) the officers and their families would not be found in any of 10,000 lakes; and (5) he was going to start an officer’s house on fire.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals held that these statements were not mere expressions of transitory anger, but that they were threats made and intended to terrorize the officers by threaten to harm and kill them and their families.  Affirmed.

State v. Chamberlain, A19-1047, Anoka County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Was the evidence sufficient to uphold defendant’s conviction for felony obstruction of legal process?

Defendant was convicted of felony obstruction of legal process.  Defendant appealed.  Defendant was at a local gas station.  A police officer arrived to arrest defendant for outstanding warrants.  Defendant attempted to flee.  A struggle between defendant and officer ensued.  During the struggle, the officer’s pinky finger was fractured.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain defendant’s conviction for felony obstruction of legal process.

State v. Zarif, A19-0651, Blue Earth County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Qualified immunity upheld where law not clearly established

Officer conducted a pat down search of a suspect during which nothing was found.  A pat search may be conducted where there is a reasonable suspicion that a person is armed and dangerous.  The suspect then ran towards bystanders and appeared to be pulling something from his waistband.  The police officer shot the suspect in the back.  Subsequently, the law was established that a pat down search that removes nothing from a suspect eliminates an officer’s probable cause that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm.  The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals held that because it was not clearly established at the time of the shooting that a pat down search that removes nothing from a suspect eliminates an officer’s probable cause that the suspect is armed and dangerous, the police officer was entitled to qualified immunity.  Affirmed.

Goffin v. Ashcraft, 18-1430, Kobes, J.  Appealed from the United States District court, Western District of Arkansas.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Whether it was not plain error for the trial court to instruct jury to to draw no inference from defendant not testifying

Defendant was convicted of violating a harassment restraining order (HRO).  At trial, the trial court instructed the jury to draw no inference from defendant’s decision not to testify.  Defendant’s counsel consented to the instruction at trial.  The trial court did not seek nor obtain defendant’s personal consent for the instruction.  Defendant appealed, arguing that the giving of the no inference instruction without obtaining defendant’s personal consent was prejudicial error.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals held that the error was not plain error, and, there was no reasonable likelihood the no inference instruction significantly affected defendant’s substantial rights.  Affirmed.

State v. Fredin, A19-0085, Ramsey County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Witness recants on the stand

Defendant was convicted of aiding and abetting second degree murder, attempted murder, and assault in the County of Ramsey, State of Minnesota.  When testifying during trial, defendant’s cellmate recanted.  The State did not know he would recant before he took the stand.  The trial court permitted the State to continue to question the cellmate after he recanted.  The trial also permitted the State to question the police about the cellmate’s out of court statements.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals held that the rule announced in State v. Dexter, 269 N.W.2d 721 (Minn. 1978), which prevents misuse of impeachment evidence, is not violated unless the party who calls the witness was aware that the witness would recant before called to the stand.  Herein, neither the State nor the defense knew the witness would recant.  Affirmed.

Moore v. State, A19-1522, Ramsey County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

Minnesota Assault Attorney & Criminal Defense Lawyer

Lynne Torgerson, Esq., a criminal defense lawyer, an assault lawyer,  with over 29 years experience, is based out of Minneapolis, Minnesota.  She practices successfully throughout the State of Minnesota.  Call Lynne Torgerson, Esq., a lawyer of excellence:  (612) 339-5073.

Our Minnesota Assault Lawyers represent clients throughout Minnesota including Minneapolis, St. Paul, Twin Cities, Edina, Eden Prairie, Bloomington, Burnsville, Minneapolis, St Paul, Brooklyn Park, Brooklyn Center, Coon Rapids, Blaine, Maple Grove, Maplewood, Woodbury and Plymouth, etc, throughout the State of Minnesota. Including, but not limited to, the counties of Hennepin County, Ramsey County, Anoka County, Dakota County,Washington County, Sherburne County, Wright County, Dakota County and Washington County, Carver County, Scott County, Wright County, Sherburne County, Isanti County, Chisago County and Stearns County. Lynne Torgerson represents clients throughout the entire State of Minnesota.

Contact Lynne Torgerson today at 612-339-5073 to schedule your free consultation. Our law firm can help you with our qualified Assault Defense Lawyer in Minneapolis, Minnesota.