Man Seeks Criminal Defense for Accessing Wife’s Email Account

A Michigan man seeks criminal defense as he faces up to five years in prison for accessing his soon to be ex-wife’s email account. The man is being prosecuted under a Michigan state anti-hacking law normally enforced to punish individuals who have hacked into a government or private business computer system. The man accessed his wife’s email account to confirm whether or not his wife was having an affair.

The 33-year-old man accessed his wife’s email and learned that she was having an affair with her second husband who had been arrested for physically abusing the woman in front of the woman’s young son. The 33-year-old is the woman’s third husband. When the 33-year-old learned of his wife’s infidelity with her second husband he worried that her son would be exposed to domestic violence again. Because of the threat, he gave the emails to the child’s father, his wife’s first husband. The father of the child then filed an emergency child custody motion. The 33-year-old was arrested in February 2009 after his wife learned that he had given emails to his wife’s first husband. The woman then filed for divorce which was concluded this month.

The prosecutor handling the criminal case characterized the man as a hacker and said that the man used his computer technician skills to gain access to a password protected email account. The 33-year-old’s criminal defense attorney said that the statute that the man is being prosecuted under is meant to protect government information and private business trade secrets and protect against identity fraud. The 33-year-old said that they shared the same family computer and that his wife’s passwords were kept in a small book next to the computer.

Responding to what he had done after being released on bond, the man said he did what he had to do to keep a child out of danger.

Source: Detroit Free Press, “Is Reading Wife’s Email a Crime? Rochester Hills Man Faces Trial,” L.L. Brasier, 12/26/10

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.