Case Results

We Get Results

Aggressive, Compassionate, Strategic, Trial Attorneys

Cadem Law logo

Don’t be fooled by attorneys who brag about a high dismissal rate when what they are actually talking about is charges that are dismissed in exchange for a plea. No plea is a “good deal” when you are innocent. You need the best to achieve the best, and the proof is in the results.

Recent Notable Victories in Which All Charges Were Dismissed Outright – No Plea

State v. K.B. – 5th & 4th Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct, Criminal Neglect of a Child; Indecent Exposure; 5th Degree Drugs; Drug Paraphernalia; All Charges Dismissed. (Jan. 2020)

Few cases have motivated me to fight harder due to the clear and overwhelming injustice of the charges. Our client was charged with sexually assaulting his disabled 15-year-old daughter, failing to provide her life saving medication, criminal neglect of the child, and possession of methamphetamines and meth pipes. The charges stemmed from allegations made by people who saw my client in a hot tub at a hotel. They did not know my client’s daughter, although 15, had the intellect of a 2 year old. They did not know that my client was required to hold his daughter on his lap to control her in the hot tub. They assumed the worst and called the police claiming he was abusing a drugged underage girl. Law enforcement wrote reports that included as facts alleged statements that the witnesses saw things they had not reported seeing. Law enforcement also made up multiple reasons to search my client’s hotel room where they then found drugs and other illegal items.  Our extensive investigation revealed that the witnesses did not report seeing the things the officers reported. Our investigation also revealed that a number of other “facts” the officers reported were false. We filed multiple omnibus motions and aggressively cross-examined the officers which significantly impeached their reports and prior testimony. The Court granted our motion to suppress all evidence located within my client’s hotel room during the search. While preparing for trial on the criminal sexual conduct charges, our investigation revealed additional evidence that the officers lied. We also uncovered a recording of the lead detective making disparaging remarks about my client’s character while apparently trying to manipulate a key witness into changing her statement. We brought another motion to dismiss the remaining charges on the basis of prosecutorial abuse, Brady violations and violation of Minn. Stat. § 609.43—Minnesota’s Public Officer Misconduct Statute. In the face of the filings and lack of true evidence of any wrongdoing, the State dismissed all remaining charges.

State v. B.B. – Noise Complaint and Disturbing the Peace – Dismissed before arraignment. (Jan. 2020.)

State v. L.E. – 3rd Probation Violation Seeking Execution – Petition for Violation Dismissed Prior to Hearing (Nov. 2019)

Our client had another attorney for her underlying case and prior probation violations. She hired us when a third violation was filed. She had previously been told she was being discharged from probation by her probation officer. She had a complete abstinence order as a condition of probation. A month later, before the order was signed, she called 911 during a domestic and it was discovered that she was intoxicated. Because this was a third violation of probation, the State was seeking execution of her full sentence. The State needed to be reminded by attorney Christopher Cadem that the State must prove all of the Austin factors to revoke probation. One of those factors is that the violation was intentional or inexcusable. Although the State claimed L.E. was told that the discharge was not official until signed by a judge, we were able to obtain copies of the text message exchanges with the probation officer showing that no such communication occurred. As we approached the admit/deny hearing, the State first offered a sanction of 120 days in jail and reinstatement. Closer to the hearing, it offered 45 days in jail. We rejected all offers. On the day of the probation violation hearing, the State withdrew the probation violation entirely. L.E. served zero additional time in jail and was actually discharged from probation at the conclusion of the hearing. As a note to others, it is important to know that even if you are “discharged from probation early,” you technically remain on probation and subject to the original conditions of the probation order for the full term of the pronounced probation. Had L.E. been represented by Cadem Law Group from the start, she would have known that. 

State. M.L. – Felony Drugs – All charges dismissed after arraignment (Oct 2019)

Our client was charged with possession of prescription drugs found within a prescription pill bottle found within the car she was driving. The pills did not match the prescription pill bottle. We immediately filed a motion challenging the traffic stop which was based upon the level of tint. Our investigation revealed that the same officer pulled over the vehicle just two weeks prior and knew that the owner had purchased the vehicle in another state and that the tint was factory applied and therefore was not illegal under Minnesota law. We also challenged the unlawful expansion of the scope of the stop. The officer had zero articulable suspicion to ask to search the vehicle after having stopped M.L. for a routine traffic offense. Finally, we challenged probable cause for the charge of possession under State v. Sam because the prescription drugs were found within the prescription pill bottle in the name of the owner of the vehicle, which was located between the driver’s seat and the center console, and the driver had no reason to know they were there or to look within someone else’s prescription bottle. In light of the case law we presented and the evidence we gathered, the State dismissed all charges prior to the omnibus hearing.

State v. E.W. – Attack by dog: All charges dismissed pretrial (August 2019)

Our client was charged with attack by animal under a local city ordinance that provided:

It shall be unlawful for any person’s animal to inflict or attempt to inflict bodily injury to any person or other animal whether or not the owner is present.
Our client’s dog was playing in the yard of her apartment building when it jumped up on and bruised the face of another resident of the building. We defended the case on the basis that the ordinance was preempted by State law, was unconstitutionally vague because it penalized the “attempt” of an animal, and that the ordinance was unconstitutional and violates due process because it penalizes a Defendant for actions and conduct of an animal irrespective of the Defendant’s actions, inactions, or knowledge. The State dismissed the complaint upon the filing of Defendant’s Motion.

State v. T.H. – Felony 2nd Degree Burglary and Theft: All charges dismissed pretrial (August 2019)

Our client was charged with burglary of a friend’s home. The friend claimed to witness our client fleeing from the home after the burglary. Our on-staff investigator conducted many interviews, including of close friends of the victim. The investigation revealed that the alleged victim lied about the time of the alleged burglary and lied that he witnessed our client fleeing. Our investigation also turned up three alibi witnesses, one of whom had a date stamped video depicting our client at least 20 miles away from the scene of the burglary at the time the burglary allegedly happened. A week before the contested omnibus in which we subpoenaed three witnesses to testify, the prosecutor dismissed all charges in light of the defense evidence and anticipated testimony.

State v. T.S., – Violation of HRO: All charges dismissed pretrial (March 2019)

Our client was charged in Ramsey County with violation of an OFP when he allegedly sent a text message to his ex-girlfriend who had an ex-parte OFP against him. Our investigation revealed that the alleged victim used a “spoofing app” to first send an anonymous message and attachment to our client to which our client responded “hello?” Our client was charged because the alleged victim’s phone and telephone records did not contain her first anonymous outgoing text message (due to use of the spoofing app) and showed the message from our client directly to her telephone number, even though his phone showed a completely different telephone number. After obtaining data and text messaging records, we showed the prosecutor the forensic fingerprint of the spoof app:  the text our client received first was an “iMessage” but our client’s text was a traditional text message, despite the alleged victim also using an iPhone. We also demonstrated that the alleged victim waited 8 days to report the alleged offense (the night before the formal OFP hearing) in hopes that he would be taken into custody and would therefore not be able to appear at the OFP hearing. In light of the evidence we uncovered and clearly presented, the State dismissed the charges the day before the pretrial.

State v. Domier – Domestic Assault appeal (A18-0221; Jan. 7, 2019)

In this case, we challenged the sufficiency of evidence for our client’s conviction and the aggravation of his crime to the felony level using multiple convictions arising from a single behavioral incident in North Dakota. While our appeal was pending decision, the Court of Appeals created new law in Minnesota directly addressing the issue.

State v. K.S., – Violation of HRO: All charges dismissed pretrial (Jan. 2019)

Our client was charged with a violation of an OFP for allegedly traveling to the alleged victim’s home to pick up his granddaughter. Our in-house investigator obtained statements from numerous witnesses which revealed that Defendant actually parked a block from the house as required by the OFP and had his fiancé retrieve his granddaughter. We took an aggressive approach to the file and made trial disclosure, including recordings, transcripts, exhibit lists, and motions in limine. Upon receipt of our filings, the State dismissed all charges.

State v. K.S. – Aiding and Abetting DAC Inimical: All charges dismissed pretrial (Oct 2018)

Our client was charged with aiding and abetting driving after cancellation when he allegedly allowed his daughter to drive his vehicle knowing her driver’s license was cancelled IPS. Our investigation revealed that our client was not even home when the vehicle was taken and, despite what law enforcement reported our client said, a careful review of the recorded interview revealed the opposite. The charges were dismissed prior to the pretrial hearing.

State v. G.H. – Disorderly Conduct, Brawling/Fighting: All charges dismissed pretrial (July 2018)

Our client was a high school student who was being harassed by a group of boys at school. One day, it was rumored that the boys were going to fight him after school. As he left the school, the boys approached him in the parking lot and directed him to a grassy field. Our client, feeling he had no choice but to either go to the grassy area or be beaten up on the pavement, went to the grassy area where he was attacked and beaten by three boys. Shockingly, our client was also charged with brawling/fighting based upon third-party statements that it was a mutual fight. Our investigation was able to obtain security footage from the school parking lot which caught the entire event on camera from multiple angles. Not only did our client not fight, at one point he sat down on the ground while the other three took turns beating him. Our investigation was also able to uncover that the third-party statements that the fight was mutual were actually from friends of the assailants. When this evidence was revealed to the State, all charges were dismissed against our client pretrial.

State v. R.E. – Fleeing in a Motor Vehicle; all charges dismissed pretrial (July 2018)

Our client was charged in Grant County with felony fleeing police in a motor vehicle. The problem, for the State, was that although the vehicle they were chasing was registered to our client, they never had visual confirmation of his identity, other than that it was “a white male with shaggy hair,” or what I like to call “50% of the Grant County population.” Although our motion to dismiss was denied by the Court, the State dismissed the charges a few weeks before trial when our client refused to accept a plea, even to a substitute misdemeanor reckless driving.

State v. J. L. – Disorderly Conduct; all charges dismissed by Court Order (June 2018)

Our client was a high school student having a bad day. He was suspended from school. On his way out of the school, he stopped in the principal’s office, swore at staff, and threw his books across the room. He was charged with disorderly conduct. We brought a motion to dismiss for lack of probable cause (also called “Florence Challenge.”) We argued that our client’s behavior, while poor, was protected first amendment speech, and that Minnesota’s disorderly conduct statute is unconstitutionally vague and overly broad. The Court granted our motion and all charges were dismissed.

State v. R.E. – Obstruction of Justice; all charges dismissed pretrial (June 2018)

Our client was charged with obstruction of justice for giving false information to law enforcement while they were investigating him for the commission of another crime. They were unable to obtain sufficient evidence to prosecute our client for the crime they were investigating, so they charged him with obstruction. Unfortunately, for the State, lying to law enforcement is not obstruction, even under the most tortured view of the Statute. The State dismissed the charges pretrial. 

State v. A.J. – Violation of HRO; all charges dismissed pretrial (April 2018)

State v. N.G. – Violation of HRO; all charges dismissed pretrial (April 2018)

State v. T.D. – Felony 2nd Degree Assault with a firearm; all charges dismissed pre-trial (March 2018)

Our client was charged with 2nd Degree Assault with a firearm which has a mandatory minimum sentence of 21 months in prison. The State alleged that when he and his brother got into a fight while driving, our client allegedly pulled out a firearm and threatened to shoot him. Law enforcement reported that a witness driving by saw our client running with the gun in his hand and acting aggressively. Our investigation revealed that in fact our client was actually punched repeatedly while driving, pulled over to escape the attack, and grabbed his firearm from the vehicle as he fled to assure his brother did not attempt to use it. Our investigation also revealed that the third-party witness actually identified the alleged victim as the aggressive one at the scene, not our client. We were also able to obtain copies of receipts from a restaurant and another store to directly contradict the alleged victim’s account of why the fight occurred. Based upon the evidence we uncovered the State dismissed all charges pretrial.

State v. L.C. – Felony Overwork/Mistreat Animals-Death/Torture; all charges dismissed pre-trial (Feb. 2018)

Our client was charged in Otter Tail County with a felony for killing a neighbor’s dog. Our investigation revealed that the dog had continually come into her yard, chased her cattle, and acted aggressively toward her and her children. We asserted a necessity defense, defense of property/chattel, and a defense under a little-known nuisance-animal statute. We also obtained statements from five other property owners who had witnessed the actions of the dog and justifying our client’s actions. Although the State took a firm approach to the case, they ultimately yielded and dismissed all charges a week before trial.

State v. N.F. – Felony Theft over $1000; all charges dismissed pretrial (Feb. 2018)

State v. J.S. – Shoplifting; all charges dismissed by Court Order (Feb. 2018)

State v. A.S. – 5th Degree Drugs, Open Bottle, Possession under 21, Paraphernalia; all charges dismissed by Court Order (Jan 8, 2018)

State v. L.S. – 3rd Degree Assault, Substantial Bodily Harm; all charges dismissed pre-trial (December 2017)

State v. C.E. – Fleeing police; all charges dismissed after initial hearing (Sept 11, 2017)

State v. C.E. –Driving after Revocation; all charges dismissed after initial hearing (Sept 9, 2017)

State v. W.Z. – Violation of City building ordinances; all charges dismissed pre-trial (August 2017)

State v. C.E. – Obstruction; all charges dismissed after initial hearing (August 2017)

State v. T.L. – 5th Degree Possession and Domestic Assault – All dismissed pre-trial. (June 28, 2017)

In the Matter of Welfare of the Children of A.B. and J.R. – CHIPS file dismissed by Court Order (May 19, 2017)

State v. J.M. – Felony Domestic Assault – All charges dismissed after initial appearance. (May 2017)

T.S. OFP – Dismissed after initial hearing. (April 2017)

State v. D.P. – $138,000 worth of marijuana and marijuana products – All charges dismissed by Court Order (April 2017)

State v. M. E. – Attack by animal; Animal at large (3 files) – All charges in all three files dismissed by Court Order (March 2017)

State v. T. S. – Driving after cancellation Inimical to public safety (gross misd.) – All charges dismissed pre-trial (March 2017)

State v. B.R. – Disorderly Conduct, Brawling/Fighting—All charges dismissed pretrial (December 2016)

State v. D.S. – Theft—All charges dismissed pretrial (November 2016)

State v. S. S. – 5th Degree Possession Controlled Substance; All charges dismissed by Court Order (October 2016)

State v. D.M. Smith – 4th Degree DWI – All charges dismissed pre-trial (October 2016)

State v. McGinnis – 1st and 2nd Degree Murder appeal (A15-1043; July 11, 2016)

Our client came to Cadem Law Group after he had been convicted for the murder. We filed an appeal challenging, among many other things, the sufficiency of evidence and inconsistent verdicts. The jury had simultaneously found that defendant had not possessed the murder weapon and that he used it to murder the victim.

A.S. and T.S.– Child in Need of Protection or Services Appeal (CHIPS) (A15-0199; July 20, 2015)

Our client had her parental rights terminated by the District Court when she came to our office seeking help. We filed an appeal challenging the simple fact of chemical dependency as basis for terminating parental rights without showing some relationship to, or affect upon, parenting the subject children.  

 

Ecker v. Comm’r Pub. Safety – Implied Consent Appeal (A14-2098; June 29, 2015)

Our client’s driver’s license was revoked when he was found sleeping in a motor vehicle in a grocery store parking lot. The arresting officer did not establish that the vehicle was his, did not locate the keys to operate the vehicle, and did not establish a time period in which Mr. Ecker actually operative the vehicle.  

State v. Stall, 845 N.W.2d 246 – Unlawful search and seizure appeal (Minn. Ct. App. 2014)

Our client was directed to stop his tractor trailer at a random commercial vehicle checkpoint. During the stop, he was cited for a number of crimes. Although we lost our motion to dismiss at the District Court, we appealed the decision. In a published opinion making new law in Minnesota, the Court of Appeals held that random commercial vehicle checkpoint stops in these circumstances is unconstitutional.

***These victories reflect recent select cases between October 2014 and January 2020, in which there was an outright dismissal of all charges. They do not reflect the 100’s of cases each year in which charges are significantly reduced by plea, receive a probation only sentence, are diverted or a continued sentence is granted. They do not reflect the fact that more than 75% of all charges brought against Cadem Law Group clients are dismissed. Please note, although Cadem Law Group has a long history of achieving exceptional results, each case is different and past results cannot be used to predict future results in any particular case***

Recent Large Jury Trial Acquittals Receiving Significant Press Coverage

State v. T.S. – Six Counts of Criminal Sexual Conduct in the Second Degree (two alleged victims)—Jury Verdict: Not Guilty all six counts. (October 2017)

State v. D. D. – 1st and 2nd Degree Murder – Jury Verdict: Not Guilty all charges (Mar. 2, 2017)

State v. D. H – Four Counts of Criminal Vehicular Homicide – Jury Verdict: Not guilty all counts (Mar. 23, 2015)

State v. J.A. – 1st Degree Rape – Jury Verdict: Not guilty all charges (Jan. 13, 2015)

Notable Appeals

State v. McGinnis (A15-1043; July 11, 2016) – 1st and 2nd Degree Murder appeal.

Our client came to Cadem Law Group after he had been convicted for the murder. We filed an appeal challenging, among many other things, the sufficiency of evidence and inconsistent verdicts. The jury had simultaneously found that defendant had not possessed the murder weapon and that he used it to murder the victim.

Ecker v. Comm’r Pub. Safety (A14-2098; June 29, 2015) – Implied Consent Appeal.

Our client’s driver’s license was revoked when he was found sleeping in a motor vehicle in a grocery store parking lot. The arresting officer did not establish that the vehicle was his, did not locate the keys to operate the vehicle, and did not establish a time period in which Mr. Ecker actually operative the vehicle.  

In the Matter of the Child of A.S. and T.S. (A15-0199; July 20, 2015) – Child in Need of Protection or Services Appeal (CHIPS)

Our client had her parental rights terminated by the District Court when she came to our office seeking help. We filed an appeal challenging the simple fact of chemical dependency as basis for terminating parental rights without showing some relationship to, or affect upon, parenting the subject children.  

State v. Stall, 845 N.W.2d 246 (Minn. Ct. App. 2014) – Unlawful search and seizure appeal.

Our client was directed to stop his tractor trailer at a random commercial vehicle checkpoint. During the stop, he was cited for a number of crimes. Although we lost our motion to dismiss at the District Court, we appealed the decision. In a published opinion making new law in Minnesota, the Court of Appeals held that random commercial vehicle checkpoint stops in these circumstances is unconstitutional.

State v. Betancourt (A-13-072; Minn. Ct. App. Dec. 30, 2013) – Felony Domestic Assault appeal challenging, among other things, the District Court’s forfeiture of defendant’s 6th Amendment Confrontation Clause rights and other procedural defects in the trial.

Banks v. Comm’r of Pub. Safety, No. A12-2288; Minn. Ct. App. July 29, 2013.

Implied consent appeal.

Our client had been charged with DWI after being stopped by law enforcement for “weaving within his lane” while driving a motorcycle. We challenged the denial of his pretrial motion to dismiss on the basis that there was insufficient evidence of impaired driving behavior and because the District Court’s relied on officer testimony which was directly contradicted by the officer’ audio/video evidence.