Felony test refusal charges filed in Southern Minnesota

A Southern Minnesota man is accused of felony test refusal after being arrested on the property of an Austin, Minnesota business April 10. In addition to the test refusal charge, authorities have brought charges of felony DWI, and two misdemeanor offenses alleging driving after revocation and fleeing an officer on foot.

Police responded to the area outside property owned by Hormel on April 10 to investigate a report of an alleged erratic driver. Police reportedly found an abandoned car. A witness claims that a man jumped a fence onto the Hormel property. Police believe that a 23-year-old man found on the property crashed the car and ran to hide after the wreck. But the car does not belong to the 23-year-old. Authorities claim that the suspect had a car key for the vehicle in his possession.

Police say that when the man was discovered hiding on the property, law enforcement shined a flashlight on him and he ran off, apparently leading to the fleeing accusation. The man reportedly has prior DWI convictions on his record, and authorities have charged him with a felony level offense, based upon his prior record. Austin Police claim that the man refused to submit to an alcohol test during the drunk driving investigation.

Generally, Minnesota statutes make it a crime to refuse an alcohol test under the implied consent law. Minnesota law says that a driver impliedly consents to an alcohol test if found driving with probable cause for law enforcement to believe that the driver is impaired.

Followers of this blog may recognize that the United States Supreme Court ruled last week that warrantless DWI tests are unconstitutional. Minnesota DWI defense lawyers say that the high court ruling requiring a warrant arguably makes the concept of implied consent a thing of the past. A binding appellate ruling on that matter has not yet been made.

Source: Austin Daily Herald, “DWI suspect faces charges, has prior convictions,” Matt Peterson, April 13, 2013

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

Digital Evidence in Sex Crime Cases: How Your Online Activity Can Be Used Against You in Minnesota

Prosecutors in Minnesota use digital evidence in sex crime cases to connect suspects to crimes. They analyze the chronological order of online events and statements to show intent, motive, or premeditation. The common types of evidence used in sex crime investigations include direct, actual, and circumstantial evidence.

Can You Be Charged With a DUI If You’re Sleeping in Your Car in Minnesota?

One of the questions DUI lawyers in the state often answer is: Can you be charged with a DUI if you’re sleeping in your car? You can face DUI charges in Minnesota even if you are not actively operating your car. The “physical control” law states that anyone with the capacity to drive a vehicle while intoxicated can get arrested and charged with DUI.

How Prosecutors Use Text Messages in Minnesota Drug Cases

Prosecutors use text messages in Minnesota drug cases to prove circumstantial evidence. Text messages can prove intent or motive to distribute drugs. Knowing how your text messages may be used against you in a drug crime case can help you plan an effective defense strategy. That’s why you should involve a Minnesota drug crime attorney immediately after you get arrested, charged, or discover the police are investigating you for a drug crime. Your lawyer can carefully examine your text messages and determine the best way to counter the prosecution’s case.