Under Minnesota law (Minn. Stat. Chap. 169A), if you are stopped for suspicion of driving under the influence or otherwise impaired by drugs or alcohol and blow higher than .08 in a breathalyzer then you will be charged with DWI. Read More...

Three years ago, Minnesota’s endeavor into medical marijuana legalization became one of the country’s most restrictive programs. Consequently, patients who were unable to afford state-approved marijuana turned to the estimated $700 million marijuana black market. Read More...

Minnesota’s DWI court program focuses on eliminating repeat DWI/DUI offenses to protect Minnesotans from the dangers of drunk driving. Programs like this have been shown to effectively reduce recidivism and jail time for repeat offenders. Read More...

Under Minnesota’s implied consent law, a motorist suspected of DWI/DUI does not have the right to refuse a breath test to determine intoxication as is the case with a blood or urine test where a warrant is required. However, there are several requirements necessary to ensure breath test validity. Read More...

The Minnesota Department of Public Safety (DPS) Office of Traffic Safety announced it will increase DWI enforcement between August 18^th and September 3^rd (Labor Day). More than 300 law enforcement agencies will be increasing officer presence and enforcement during this time as part of a broader effort to protect Minnesotans from drunk driving. Read More...

Not everyone who is stopped for DWI/DUI is guilty. There are several circumstances that an experienced and knowledgeable DWI/DUI attorney can argue are illegitimate for a successful DWI conviction. Read More...

The impact of a recent Supreme Court decision continues to reverberate around the country. As we’ve discussed, Birchfield v. North Dakota, which was decided a little over a year ago, was an important case that led to changes in the way law enforcement officials handle certain drunk driving cases. The Supreme Court decided that warrantless breath tests were allowed, but found that in most cases, warrantless blood tests were an unconstitutional invasion of a person’s rights. Read More...

Most people understand that if they’re stopped by the police and suspected of drunk driving, it’s possible they’ll be asked to submit to a breathalyzer or perhaps some field sobriety tests. We see these kinds of things depicted regularly on television and in movies. What isn’t as common knowledge is that police can and often do ask drivers to submit to blood or urine tests to determine potential impairment. Are these tests required? Can you be punished for not complying? The North Dakota Supreme Court is currently tackling these very important questions. To learn more, keep reading. Read More...

Several state lawmakers have proposed a ban on all cellphone use while driving except in emergencies or hands-free mode. The bill is co-authored by Rep. Frank Hornstein (D-Minneapolis) and Rep. Mark Uglem (R-Champlin). If passed, Minnesota would join 14 other states—and Washington, D.C.—with such a “hands-free” law. Read More...

Pursuant to Minnesota law, DWI suspects who refuse a breath test are in violation of the state’s implied consent law which criminalizes such an act, subjecting the suspect to additional legal and administrative sanctions. Whereas once refusing to submit to a blood and/or urine test was also deemed in violation of the law, recent court rulings have determined that blood and/or urine tests require law enforcement officers to obtain a warrant. Read More...