Burnsville woman sentenced to over 4 years in felony DWI case

A Burnsville woman who pled guilty to felony DWI test refusal and drug possession charges has been sentenced to just over four years in prison after pleading guilty to two of three charged felonies. One count of felony DWI was dismissed. In March, this blog discussed the case against the woman who was accused of drugged driving after a December 2010 traffic stop.

The woman reportedly had refused to submit a blood sample under Minnesota’s implied consent law on the night of her arrest and was charged with DWI. The woman’s charges were enhanced to the felony DWI charges based upon a Felony criminal vehicular operation conviction from 2005.

In the recent case, police claimed that they could smell marijuana in the car during the traffic stop, and that prescription pills were found during a search of the car. She was charged with felony driving under the influence of a controlled substance, felony DWI test refusal and felony possession of a controlled substance after her arrest.

In March, as this blog reported, the woman sought to take her case to a jury. The Dakota County prosecutor reportedly had said in March that he intended to seek a 10-year prison sentence against the woman. That 10-year sentence reportedly would have been what is known as an upward departure.

Experienced DWI defense lawyers know that Minnesota sentencing laws are complex, and sentences can vary greatly in individual cases based upon a variety of factors and arguments before the sentencing judge.

The lengthy prison sentence that Dakota County prosecutors planned to pursue would have been double the presumptive recommended sentence under Minnesota’s sentencing guidelines, according to a story in the St. Paul Pioneer Press. The woman faced sentencing at a hearing earlier this week and the judge imposed a sentence of four-years-three months in prison for the woman, significantly less than the prosecutor had wanted.

Source: St. Paul Pioneer Press, “Burnsville woman gets prison for second DWI,” Maricella Miranda, May 2, 2012

Max Keller has won countless jury trial cases involving misdemeanors and felonies, sex crimes, and DWI’s. He is a member of the Minnesota Society for Criminal Justice, which only allows the top 50 criminal defense attorneys in the state as members. Max is a frequent speaker at CLE’s and is often asked for advice by other defense attorneys across Minnesota.

Years of Experience: Approx. 20 years
Minnesota Registration Status: Active
Bar & Court Admissions: State of Minnesota Minnesota State Court Minnesota Federal Court 8th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals State of Maryland

What to Do If You Have Been Charged with a Criminal Offense

The Surprising Cost of a Guilty Criminal Plea in Minnesota

Defendants in Minnesota may plead guilty or accept deals without understanding the hidden cost of a guilty criminal plea. A guilty criminal plea, regardless of how appealing it appears, can leave you dealing with substantial lifelong consequences. You may skip lengthy trial proceedings and likely get a lenient sentence, but end up with a criminal record. The record can lead to various financial and collateral consequences, including difficulty in securing employment, loss of housing rights, license revocation, and immigration issues.

What You Can Expect at a Pre-Trial Motions Hearing in Minnesota

The pre-trial motions hearing is a court session you attend after your first arraignment. At the hearing, the prosecution and defense appear before a judge to clear several details about the case before trial. These details include pre-trial motions, evidentiary queries, and constitutional matters.

Refusing Arrest vs. Resisting Arrest in Minnesota: What’s the Difference?

Highly publicized incidents of police using excessive force over the past few years have led to people wondering, “What’s the difference between refusing arrest vs. resisting arrest?” Resisting arrest in Minnesota occurs when you use force to prevent a police officer from making a lawful arrest. Refusing an arrest, on the other hand, involves statements or actions that show reluctance to cooperate with an officer’s instructions without using force.