Technology used to indict someone for theft raises questions

This blog has previously mentioned the high degree of evidence that the state of Minnesota must prove to be able to convict someone of a crime. Not only must there be evidence, but the evidence must be credible and must be lawfully obtained. If it is not or if there is insufficient evidence to prove a suspect committed a crime beyond a reasonable doubt, the state will lose and the suspect will be acquitted of any wrongdoing.

A Columbia Heights woman was recently arrested for possession of stolen property, but her arrest could raise some questions about whether prosecutors have sufficient evidence to convict her. The way that police tracked her down was by using the “Find My iPad” app.

Earlier this month, an individual said that his iPad had been stolen from a hotel in Minneapolis and that he had located the iPad through this application. The app will allow someone to login to an account and track the location of his or her iPad, and the owner said his was located in a home on the 500 block of 37th Avenue. When police arrived, they found the iPad inside the home and the woman who lived there was arrested.

While it is possible that this woman is responsible for stealing the iPad, it is also possible that she was given it or bought it with no idea that it had been illegally obtained. Just because the tablet was in her home does not mean that she stole it and prosecutors will need to provide considerable evidence that this woman knew she was in possession of a stolen iPad before they will be able to convict her.

Just because police arrest and accuse someone of a crime does not mean that the person will be convicted. Working with a criminal defense attorney who can unravel assumptions made by the state is crucial in clearing a suspect’s name in a theft case.

Source: KSTP 5 ABC, “‘Find My iPad’ App Locates Theft Suspect,” Jennie Olson, Nov. 8, 2012

Learn more about possession of stolen property and other theft crimes by visiting our website.

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.