DWI Charge Dismissed
Mr. Ventura obtained the Pre-trial dismissal of a 2nd Degree DWI – Refuse to Submit to Chemical Test charge and successfully challenged the forfeiture of the client’s vehicle.
The client was stopped for allegedly driving under the influence. After a PBT test was taken, the officer realized that the client was not impaired by alcohol. Based upon the client’s behavior and 0.00 PBT test result, the officer believed that the client was under the influence of a controlled substance. The client was arrested and transported to the police station where the officer requested that the client take an unwarranted blood test. The client refused the blood test or a urine test. He was then charged with 2nd Degree DWI – Refuse to Submit to Chemical Test. Mr. Ventura knew that State v. Trahan was pending before the Minnesota Supreme Court and had very similar facts to the client’s case. Mr. Ventura persuade the Trial Court to continue the case until the Minnesota Supreme Court made their final decision in State v. Trahan.
The Minnesota Supreme Court decided favorably in State v. Trahan. The Court of Appeals had concluded that it was illegal for law enforcement to charge a person with refusal to submit to a chemical test for refusing to provide an unwarranted blood sample. Law enforcement agencies are required to obtain a warrant, signed by a Judge if they want to test a person’s blood.
After the decision was filed in State v. Trahan, Mr. Ventura contacted the Prosecuting Attorney to discuss the client’s case. Mr. Ventura convinced the Prosecutor to dismiss the client’s case based upon the Minnesota Supreme Court’s holding in State v. Trahan.
As a result of a 2nd Degree DWI charge in Minnesota, the client’s vehicle was seized and forfeited by law enforcement. After the dismissal of the criminal charges, Mr. Ventura demanded the return of the client’s vehicle as the client was not convicted of the crime that was the basis for the vehicle forfeiture. Mr. Ventura was successful in his efforts and the client’s vehicle was released to him at no charge.
Mr. Ventura believes in providing the best representation to each and every one of his client’s. He diligently works to keep up with all the pending and newly decided case law so that he is able to provide the best defense to each of his clients. In this case, Mr. Ventura’s due diligence significantly benefited his client. The client was able to escape a serious criminal charge that carried a mandatory jail sentence, fine, and license revocation. Further, Mr. Ventura was able to compel the return of the client’s vehicle at no cost.