Anoka, MN.  A client recently tested positive for consumption of alcohol in violation of his conditions of probation. The client’s urine tested positive for ethyl glucuronide (EtG) andethyl sulfate (EtS), which are produced by the body during the metabolization of alcohol.  EtG and EtS tests are part of a new wave of forensic urine testing being used by probation agencies, including Anoka County Probation, to monitor alcohol consumption.

During his investigation and research for the case, Mike uncovered several problems with EtG and EtS testing which can cause false positives. This client was exposed to ethanol fumes (one source of false positives) on a daily basis. Based on this research Mike was able to convince the prosecutor that the probation violation charge should be dismissed because the evidence against the client was unreliable and unlikely to be admitted.

When dealing with EtG and EtS tests a thorough investigation is needed to make sure that you are not the victim of a false-positive EtG or EtS test. How much your attorney knows about EtG and EtS testing can make the difference. At Brandt Criminal Defense we have the experience to provide you with your best defense.

Mike Brandt recently obtained a dismissal of a charge of Underage Consumption where his client was at a party with several people under 21.  The police responded to the party, entered the house, and determined that Mike’s client had been drinking and issued a citation for Underage Consumption.  This charge had many possible consequences, as Mike’s client was on probation for a similar charge.

Mike conducted a thorough investigation of the case and presented the evidence to the prosecutor, who agreed with Mike and on the day of trial, dismissed the charge.

This is another example of the analysis, research, and preparation that Brandt Criminal Defense puts into their cases.

Mike Brandt prevailed in challenging a District Court order granting $2,240 in restitution. The District Court Judge had previously ordered restitution at a sentencing hearing in a criminal sexual conduct case.  Mike sucessfully conviced the judge to sentence the defendant to probation but the judge ordered restitution in the amount of 2,240.  Mike objected to the restitution and filed a motion to vacate the restitution order, arguing that the person requesting restitution was not a victim under Minnesota Statute §611A.01.

Minnesota Statute §611A.01 requires that restitution be limited to a “person who incurs loss or harm as a result of a crime.” After carefully researching the issue, Mike successfully persuaded both the Judge and Prosecutor that the mother of the victim was not a victim under the statute for purposes of restitution. In doing so was Mike able to get the restitution order for the Mother vacated which reduced the restitution from over $2,300 to $112.

Mike’s research and arguments not only kept his client out of jail but saved his client $2,240. Mike’s diligent preparation and careful scrutiny of his clients’ cases again resulted in a favorable outcome for yet another client.

In August, the City of Minneapolis charged Kelly Keegan’s client with a violation of Minneapolis City Ordinance 228.30(c)(3) – improper storage of firewood. The City of Minneapolis had claimed that her client had improperly stored his firewood less than eight (8) inches off the ground. After the initial appearance in Hennepin County District Court, Kelly contacted the City of Minneapolis to negotiate a deal. Kelly was able to negotiate a dismissal if the client removed the firewood from his property.

In addition to negotiating the dismissal of the criminal charge, Kelly was able to negotiate a substantial reduction in the client’s civil fines. The initial civil fines amounted to $5,500 but after negotiation the city agreed to reduce the fines S3,960. Kelly’s skillful negotiation not only saved her client thousands of dollars but resulted in a complete dismissal of the criminal charges.

City ordinance violations might seem insignificant, but they are no laughing matter. If not dealt with promptly, civil fines add up quickly and criminal sanctions carry a maximum sentence of 90 days in jail and a $1,000 fine. The Attorneys at Brandt Criminal Defense can help you negotiate the complicated legal proceedings and vigorously advocate on your behalf. This case is yet another example of how their experience and dedication has benefitted their clients.

Mike Brandt recently won a trial where his client was accused of operating an overweight truck on a restricted road.  Mike’s client was assessed a civil penalty of nearly $4,000 for the incident.  Mike argued to the court that his client was not given sufficient notice of the road restrictions and did not have an opportunity to turn around before the deputies stopped him.  The court agreed and awarded the county $0.

This case is another example of the vigorous legal advocacy provided by Brandt Criminal Defense.