Success/Results2020-02-11T14:33:46+00:00

Criminal Sexual Conduct

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Was the evidence sufficient to prove 4th degree criminal sexual conduct and 1st degree burglary?

Defendant was convicted, inter alia, of attempted 4th degree criminal sexual conduct and 1st degree burglary, out of the County of Crow Wing, State of Minnesota.  On appeal, he challenged, inter alia, the sufficiency of the evidence.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that (1) defendant’s conduct of removing the blanket from the victim while she was asleep and touching her thigh, was sufficient to support his conviction for attempted 4th degree criminal sexual conduct; and (2) because the evidence was sufficient to support that conviction, the evidence was sufficient for the 1st degree burglary.  Affirmed.

State v. Carter, A19-1290, Crow Wing County.

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

3rd Degree Assault

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Whether the improper testimony of expert witness did not likely play a substantial part in influencing the jury to convict?

Defendant was convicted of 3rd degree felony assault in the County of Ramsey, State of Minnesota.  Defendant appealed.  Defendant contended that the State committed prejudicial error by failing to prepare an expert witness to testify consistently with the trial court’s in limine order.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals agreed that the expert’s example about an infant being dropped violated the pretrial order.  However, it concluded that the error did not likely play a substantial part in influencing the jury to convict, given other strong evidence.  Affirmed.

State v. Beamon, A19-1092, Ramsey County.

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

Criminal Sexual Conduct

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Whether the court’s failure to reconvene the parties to respond to a juror question was harmless error?

Defendant was convicted of criminal sexual conduct.  On appeal, he argued that the trial court erred by answering a question from the jury without first consulting the parties.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that although the trial erred by responding to a juror’s question about the substance of a detective testimony without convening the parties, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt as the court instructed the jury to rely on memory and recollection.

State v. Cookson, A19-0629, Clay County.

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

Theft by Swindle

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Whether the offenses of theft by swindle and theft by false representation were not the same behavioral incident?

Defendant was convicted and sentenced for convictions of one (1) count of theft by swindle and five (5) counts of theft by false representation.  On appeal, defendant argued that the trial court erred when it treated several of the convictions as separate offense instead of part of the same behavioral incident.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that the convictions did not arise our of the same behavioral incident, noting that they involved claims that defendant submitted on behalf of a personal care provider organization in 2013, 2014, and 2015.  Affirmed.

State v. Williams, A19-1352, Hennepin County.

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

Res Judicata

Whether appellant’s claims were barred under the doctrine of res judicata?

The pro se parties had been in extensive civil, administrative, and criminal litigation arising from events related to a contract for residential construction.  The trial court granted respondent’s motion to dismiss appellants’ 11 claims on the ground that they were barred under the doctrine of res judicata.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals upheld the dismissals under the doctrine of res judicata on the grounds that appellants either did litigate or had the opportunity to litigate all of their claims against respondents in a prior 2013 breach of contract case and a 2018 breach of contract and fraud case.

Carlson v. Minn. Dept. of Labor & Indus., A19-1485, Ramsey County.

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

Juvenile Delinquency Case

Minnesota Juvenile Delinquency Lawyer Lynne Torgerson obtains dismissal of 5th degree misdemeanor assault case in Ramsey County Juvenile Court

Defendant was a seventeen (17) year old female juvenile.  She was charged with 5th degree assault.  It was alleged she assaulted another female juvenile.  Ms. Torgerson’s client had long term career plans of going to school to become a nurse and becoming a nurse.  A conviction of a misdemeanor assault may have caused a seven (7) year disqualification.  The disqualification also applies to schooling.  Thus, any conviction resulting in a disqualification could have caused a significant seven (7) year delay in beginning college to become a nurse, and her career as a nurse.  Fortunately, Ms. Torgerson obtained a dismissal of the case from the Ramsey County Attorney’s Office.  Accordingly, Ms. Torgerson’s client did not plead guilty to anything crime, and she was not convicted/adjudicated of any crime, whereby her record remained clean.  She was also able to immediately begin schooling and pursing her career in nursing.  Well done Ms. Torgerson.

Harassment Restraining Orders

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Whether the two or more instances of unwanted conduct was sufficient for harassment restraining order?

Ex-girlfriend obtained a harassment restraining order against ex-boyfriend.  Ex-boyfriend appealed alleging that the record did not support finding that he engaged in more than one instance of intrusive or unwanted conduct.  The Minnesota Court Appeals held that the ex-boyfriend engaged in harassment on two separate occasions, whereby the record supported a determination that ex-boyfriend engaged in repeated incidents of harassing conduct toward ex-girlfriend.  Affirmed.

Hockert v. Towle, A19-1904, Anoka County.

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

Parole Supervised Release

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Whether the District Court properly imposed the special condition of supervised release of no contact with girlfriend?

Defendant argued that the District Court erred when it imposed the special condition of supervised release of no contact with his girlfriend.  The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals held that there was no error because the defendant committed the Iowa offense of domestic assault, of his history of violence against women, his recidivism and attempts to influence his girlfriend’s testimony, and the underlying incident, which involved him choking his pregnant girlfriend until she almost lost consciousness.  Affirmed.

United States v. Fisher, 19-1989, per curiam.  Appealed from the United States District Court, Northern District of Iowa.

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

Felon in Possession of Firearm

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Whether the District Court properly enhanced defendant’s sentence for felon in possession of a firearm?

Defendant was convicted in federal court of felon in possession of a firearm.  Defendant appealed his sentence.  In sentencing, the District Court properly linked the gun in defendant’s pocket to drugs in his backpack.  Accordingly, the District Court did not err in applying an enhancement for possessing a firearm in connection with a felony drug offense.  Affirmed.

United States v. Mitchell, 19-2780, Benton, J.  Appealed from the United States District Court, Western District of Missouri.

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

Criminal Sexual Conduct Charges

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Whether the trial court erred in imposing lifetime terms of conditional release?

Defendant was convicted of criminal sexual conduct.  On appeal, defendant argued that the trail court erred in imposing lifetime terms of conditional release because the multiple convictions were entered simultaneously in the same proceeding, and the defendant had no other criminal sexual conduct convictions.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals held that the trial court convicted defendant of all four (4) counts simultaneously, and thus, the imposition of a lifetime conditional release term was not permissible.  Reversed and remanded.

State v. Artola, A19-0950, Hennepin County.

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

Controlled Substance Crime

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Whether the identity of the confidential did not need to be disclosed?

Defendant was charged with a controlled substance crime.  Defendant brought a motion to disclose the identity of the confidential informant.  The trial court denied defendant’s motion.  On appeal, defendant argued that the trial court erred when it refused to compel the disclosure of the identity of the confidential informant.  The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the trial court did not err because the defendant failed to show why the informant’s identity was material, and, defendant never sought to call the informant as a witness,.  Affirmed.

United States v. Neal, 10-1289, per curiam.  Appealed from the United States District Court, District of Arkansas.

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

Dissemination of Private Sexual Images

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Defendant’s conviction for nonconsensual dissemination of private sexual images is reversed on the grounds that the statute is unconstitutional

Defendant was convicted of nonconsensual dissemination of private sexual images, felony domestic assault, and aggravated first degree witness tampering.  On appeal, defendant argued that his conviction for nonconsensual dissemination of private images must be reversed because the statute under which he was convicted, Minn. Stat. §617.261, was constitutional.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals held that Minn. Stat. § 617.261 is unconstitutional and reversed defendant’s conviction thereof.  Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

State v. Saari, A19-1102, St. Louis County.

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

Pre-Charge Representation

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson successfully avoids the formal charging of her client with assault following Pre-Charge Representation

Minneapolis Criminal Defense Attorney Lynne Torgerson successfully avoid the formal charging of her client with assault following Pre-Charge Represention, out of the City of Bloomington, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota.  Ms. Torgerson’s client was married.  Unfortunately, Ms. Torgerson’s client’s spouse began having an affair.  An incident allegedly occurred at a local hotel.  An investigation was conducted by the local police department.  Ultimately, the prosecution made the decision to not charge Ms. Torgerson’s client with assault, nor any other crime.  Well done Ms. Torgerson.

Mandamus

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Whether the mandamus did not lie because petitioners had an adequate remedy at law?

Real estate developer and ten other landowners sought a writ of mandamus directing county to maintain the roads in a subdivision and recognize them as public rights of way.  Developer argued that the trial court erred by:  (1) concluding that mandamus did not lie because developer had an adequate remedy at law; and (2) sua sponte granting summary judgment to county and dismissing the complaint.  Noting that the county board had jurisdiction to consider a complaint that the that the township improperly failed to maintain a town road, the Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that the developer had an adequate remedy at law.  Affirmed.

Slater v. Wabasha County, A19-2017, Wabasha County.

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

1st Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Whether defendant’s conviction for criminal sexual conduct can rest on the uncorroborated testimony of a single credible witness?

Defendant was convicted of 1st degree criminal sexual conduct.  Defendant’s friend’s daughter testified that defendant had sexually abused her over  a multiple year span.  Defendant argued on appeal that the evidence was insufficient because the victim’s testimony was not corroborated and her credibility had flaws.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals held that it does not reweigh credibility on appeal, and that a conviction can rest on the uncorroborated testimony of a single credible witness.  Affirmed.

State v. Banks, A19-0935, Hennepin County.

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

3rd Degree Felony Assault

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Whether the prosecutor’s closing arguments were proper in light of defense counsel’s statements

Defendant was convicted of 3rd degree felony assault.  He had engaged in a fight in prison.  Defendant appealed.  Defendant argued that the prosecutor’s closing remarks during rebuttal were unduly prejudicial.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals held that the prosecutor’s comments did not constitute plain error when he argued that the laws had to apply in the prison in order to protect everyone, when given after defense counsel’s argument that prison is a “dangerous place” and a “fight club.”  Affirmed.

State v. Fisherman, A19-1506, Chisago County.

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

Sexual Assault

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Whether the District Court did not err by excluding hearsay statements of girlfriend made before her death?

Defendant was convicted of sexual assault.  At trial, the District Court excluded, as hearsay, statements made by defendant’s girlfriend before her death.  The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the trial court did not err because her statement did not meet the catch all hearsay exception because they did not show circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness.  Additionally, the District Court did not err in enhancing defendant’s sentence for committing perjury.  Affirmed.

United States v. Bruguier, 19-1375, Kobes, J.  Appealed from the United States District Court, District of South Dakota.

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

Gun Rights Restoration Lawyer

Minnesota Second Amendment Lawyer Lynne Torgerson wins gun rights restoration in the County of Rice, State of Minnesota

Minnesota Second Amendment Attorney Lynne Torgerson won a petition to restore rights to possess firearms in the County of Rice, State of Minnesota.  Ms. Torgerson’s client was now 50 years old.  He was a high school graduate.  He was a college graduate.  He had been employed on a long term basis, 20 years, as a Senior Draftsman.  He had one (1) serious offense approximately twenty two (22) years earlier.  He was discharged from parole in 1993.  He wanted to be able to go hunting again.  Finding good cause, The Honorable John T. Cajacob granted Ms. Torgerson’s client’s request.  Well done Ms. Torgerson.

Sale of Stolen Firearms

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Whether defendant’s sentence in federal court for sale of stolen firearms was correct?

Defendant was convicted of conspiring to sell stolen firearms.  He appealed his sentence.  The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals held that (1) there was adequate support in the record for a firearms trafficking enhancement, and (2) that the District Court had properly denied a reduction for acceptance of responsibility because he later attempted to deny at sentencing what he admitted in the plea agreement.  Affirmed.

United States v. Anderson, 19-3106, per curiam.  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.

Drug Charges

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Whether there was sufficient evidence to prove possession with intent to distribute?

Defendant was convicted of conspiracy to distribute drugs and possession with intent to distribute.  Defendant appealed.  The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld defendant’s convictions on the grounds that there was sufficient evidence because the testimony was consistent with intent to distribute, he was not sharing drugs for personal use, and it was not a mere buyer-seller case.  Affirmed.

United States v. Little, 19-2729, per curiam.  Appealed from the United States District Court, District of South Dakota.

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

Escape from Custody

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Whether the evidence was insufficient to prove escape from custody?

Defendant was convicted of escape from custody in federal court.  The evidence was that he was late in reporting to a halfway house.  The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the evidence was not sufficient to show that he willfully left the extended limits of confinement.  Conviction reversed and remanded.

United States v. Little, 19-2729, per curiam.  Appealed from the United States District court, District of South Dakota.

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

Threats of Violence

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Whether defendant’s statement was an expression of transitory anger or a threat of violence?

Defendant was convicted of felony threats of violence and misdemeanor domestic assault against his mother.  On appeal, defendant contended that (1) his statement was merely an expression of transitory anger; and (2) the trial court by sentencing him on both the threats of violence and domestic assault convictions.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals held that (1) his statement to his mother that she was f—– dead and the mother’s fear was sufficient evidence to uphold defendant’s conviction of threats of violence and (2) that the trial court did err in sentencing defendant for both counts, because they were a single behavioral incident. Affirmed in pat, reversed in part, and remanded.

State v. Holmes, A19-1131, Pennington County.

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

Possession of Paraphernalia

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Beware federal court:  a defendant’s sentence can be made significantly longer for prior petty misdemeanor possession of paraphernalia convictions in State court

Defendant was charged in federal court and convicted.  At sentencing, the District Court included one point for each of defendant’s two (2) prior state convictions for possession of drug paraphernalia.  In State court, possession of paraphernalia are a petty misdemeanor, and convictions thereof are treated as being not a criminal offense.  However, in federal court, in sentencing, these convictions can be used to enhance a defendant’s sentence, meaning making a defendant’s sentence in federal court significantly longer.  Herein, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the District Court did not err in enhancing defendant’s sentence because of her State court possession of paraphernalia convictions.

United States v. Walker, 19-2216, per curiam.  Appealed from the United States District court, Northern District of Iowa.

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

Domestic Abuse Murder

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Whether defendant’s statements should not have been suppressed

Defendant was convicted of 1st degree premeditated murder, 1st degree domestic abuse murder, and 2nd degree intentional murder.  On appeal, defendant argued that the trial court erred in admitting statement he made during police interrogation, arguing he invoked his right to remain silent and did not waive his Miranda rights.

The Minnesota Supreme Court held that the trial court did not err in denying defendant’s motion to suppress his statement on the grounds that (1) he did not unambiguously or unequivocally invoke his right to remain silent and he implicitly waived his Miranda rights.

State v. Balandin, A19-0625, Scott County.

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

NICs Denial Analogy

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Whether a defendant is a prevailing party when the complaint is dismissed with prejudice?

Plaintiff sued in State court for claims related to asbestos removal.  The case was dismissed with prejudice, in favor of defendants.  The court awarded defendants costs and disbursements as a prevailing party under Minn. Stat. §549.04, subd. 1.  Pro se plaintiff appealed.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals noted that a dismissal with prejudice operates as an adjudication on the merits, whereby the defendant is a prevailing party.  Affirmed.

Moore v. Robinson Envtl., A19-1844 (Hennepin County).

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

DWI/DUI

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Whether a certified driving record was insufficient to prove the defendant received notice of a prior drivers license revocation?

Defendant was convicted of felony 1st degree driving while intoxicated.  On appeal, defendant argued that the State failed to provide that she had three (3) prior qualified impaired driving incidents under Minn. Stat. §169A.24, subd. 1(1).  The Minnesota Court of Appeals held that the defendant’s certified driving record was insufficient to prove that defendant received notice of a prior license revocation, without which the State cannot demonstrate the required three (3) prior qualified impaired driving incidents.  Reversed and remanded.

State v. Moore, A19-1055, Stearns County.

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

Theft

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Did the evidence establish conspiracy to commit theft?

Defendant was convicted of conspiracy to commit theft.  On appeal, defendant contended that the circumstantial evidence was not sufficient to prove conspiracy to commit theft.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals noted that the evidence showed that defendant and another walked around a store, put items in a cart while talking to each other, put items into a backpack, left the store together with the backpack, and then jointly returned to the store after seeing a police officer and hid the backpack.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals held that the evidence was consistent with guilt and inconsistent with the hypothesis that defendant was planning to commit theft alone.

State v. Krabbenhoft, A19-0817, Clay County.

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

Domestic Assault

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Whether the trial erred in admitting the alleged victim’s out of court recorded statement to police?

Defendant was convicted of domestic assault.  He appealed.  On appeal, the defendant contended the trial court erred in admitting the alleged victim’s out of court recorded statement to police under the residual exception to the hearsay rule.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals held that the trial court erred.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals noted that (1) the trial erred in presuming that the prosecution intended to introduce the out of court statement for purposes of impeachment; and (2) the Court was incapable of determining whether there were sufficient guarantees of trustworthiness.  Reversed and remanded.

State v. Wersinger, A19-0738, Stevens County.

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

1st Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct

CASE LAW UPDATE:  A 10 year conditional release term cannot be imposed on an attempt offense.

Defendant was charged with attempted first degree criminal sexual conduct and kidnapping.  In the trial court, the trial court found defendant competent to proceed based upon one (1) out of three (3) expert reports.  Defendant was found guilty.  He was sentenced to a ten (10) year conditional release term.  On appeal, the Minnesota Court of Appeals vacated the ten (10) year conditional release term on the grounds that a ten (10) year conditional release term cannot be imposed for an attempt offense.

State v. Hassan, A19-0898, Anoka County.

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

Pigs in the City

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Is it illegal to have pigs in the City of Minneapolis and will you be punished if caught?

The short answer is . . . Yes.

It was alleged that Relator was harboring pigs in the City of Minneapolis.  It was also alleged that Relator interfered with an Animal Control Worker; (they are really not very pleasant).  Officers went to Relator’s home.  Officers found a sow and piglet in Relator’s home, and saw animal feces and urine, suggesting that the pigs lived there.  Relator was found guilty by the Hearing Officer of both counts.  On appeal, the Minnesota Court of Appeals upheld Relator’s convictions on the grounds that substantial evidence supported the Hearing Officer’s determinations.  Affirmed.

In re Admin. Citation V19-002353, A19-1313 (City of Minneapolis).

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

Self Defense

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Did the defendant act in self defense?

Defendant was charged with 1st degree assault.  The evidence was that while on a light rail platform, he slashed another man’s face with a razor blade.  Defendant raised the defense of self defense.  The jury found defendant guilty.  On appeal, the Minnesota Court of Appeals held that (1) the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant did not act in self defense; (2) the trial court did not err by excluding evidence of the victim’s blood alcohol concentration; and (3) the trial court did not err by giving the jury a supplemental instruction after the foreperson indicated the jury was deadlocked.  Affirmed.

State v. Richardson, A19-0643, Ramsey County.

Bribery

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Did the defendant commit bribery of a witness?

Defendant was convicted of bribery.  He appealed.  He contended that the evidence was insufficient to prove that he intended to influence the testimony of a witness.   The Minnesota Court of Appeals held that the bribery statute, § 609.42, subd. 1(d), does not require that the would be bribee be subpoenaed as a witness in an upcoming , scheduled proceeding, and that it includes prospective or contemplated witnesses, as well as those who have been served a subpoena to testify.  Affirmed.

State v. Kalland, A19-1228, Renville County.

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

Felon in Possession of a Firearm

Minnesota Firearms Charges Attorney Lynne Torgerson successfully obtains stay of adjudication in felon in possession case

Minnesota Firearms Charges Lawyer Lynne Torgerson successfully obtains a stay of adjudication in felon in possession case out of the County of Todd, State of Minnesota.  Ms. Torgerson’s client was charged with felon in possession of a firearm.  He asserted that he believed he was legal to possess given he was so told when he purchased a hunting license.  His belief was erroneous.  A DNR Officer found him hunting on his land, in possession of a firearm.  The potential penalty is a mandatory minimum of five (5) years in prison, up to 15 years in prison.  Fortunately, the State prosecutor agreed to a stay of adjudication, and no jail time.  That means Ms. Torgerson’s client is not convicted of any crime.  If successful on probation, the charge and case is dismissed, and keeps his record clean of this offense.  He would also be eligible for an expungement.  Well done Ms. Torgerson.

Corona Virus Update March 25, 2020

Update on Corona Virus

In regard to the corona virus related issues, this office is fully open and fully operational. I have been recognized as an essential worker in the Governor’s Executive Order. My work and cases are not affected, other than the courts appear to be slowing down. I also plan to do more Intakes via telephone conference, rather than in my office downtown Minneapolis.

Because my work involves protecting very important liberties and Constitutional Rights, and because I am a Criminal Defense Lawyer in criminal cases, and because citizens have a right to representation in criminal cases, which is guaranteed by the 6th Amendment to the United States Constitution, and, because a lot of work is done remotely, everything can easily proceed normally.

 

Areas of Law

Ms. Torgerson can represent you and your loved one, on the following charges:

appeals, assault, aggravated assault, aggravated robbery, arson, burglary, carry and conceal, check forgery, child pornography, controlled substance crimes, credit card fraud, criminal sexual conduct, criminal vehicular operation, disorderly conduct, domestic abuse, domestic assault, domestic abuse no contact orders, drug charges, DWI/DUI, criminal sexual conduct, detox release, driving after suspension / revocation / cancellation, drivers license issues, electronic communications with a minor child, embezzlement, expungements, failure to register, false imprisonment, fleeing the police, forfeitures, forgery, fraud, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, gun charges, gun rights restoration, habeas corpus, harassment, harassment restraining order violations, homicide, identity theft, indecent exposure, juvenile crimes, kidnapping, manslaughter, murder, obstructing legal process, orders for protection, parole violations, pornography, postconviction relief petitions, probation violations, prostitution, restraining orders, Second Amendment, sexual assault, sex crimes, shoplifting, solicitation of prostitution, terroristic threats, theft, theft by swindle, threats of violence, violation of orders for protection, weapons offenses, white collar crimes, and all other misdemeanors, gross misdemeanors and felonies.