Minneapolis DUI-DWI Lawyer | Minnesota

DWI is a serious crime and when arrested for this crime, it can be difficult to fight the charges. The arresting officer will perform field sobriety tests to determine if you are drunk and, if he or she decides that you are, then you will be handcuffed and taken to jail. If you refuse the field sobriety tests, you will still be taken to jail for further testing. You will be fingerprinted, photographed, and asked to submit to chemical testing for the presence of alcohol and/or controlled substances. You do, however, have the option to contact an attorney first, and the DWI lawyers of Meaney & Patrin, PA, are available for you 24 hours when you’ve been arrested for DWI.

The reason why that first phone call should be to your lawyer is because you do not want to say anything to the police that could be used against you in court. Even the smallest statement could be twisted into something you did not mean. In other words, anything can be taken out of context in order to prove your guilt. The decision to submit to testing also has numerous implications either way.

Even if you have already made it home, the DWI GUYS can help you. Seek immediate consultation by filling out the form to the right or calling our office at 612-333-3636. We can help.

Position	Organization	Location	Duration
Associate Attorney	Gerald Miller & Associates	Minneapolis	2002-2005
Associate Attorney	Hoff, Barry & Kuderer, PA	Eden Prairie, MN	2001-2002

School	Degree	Major	Graduation
University of South Dakota School of Law	J.D.	Law School	1999
Northern State University	Bachelor of Science & Sociology	Political Science & Sociology	1996 Magna Cum Laude

State / Court	Date
Minnesota	1999

• Association of Federal Defense Attorneys                        
  DUI Law                                                        
  DUI Litigaton Attorney's Network                                
  Federal Bar Association, Minnesota Chapter                        
  Forensic Science Litigation Attorney Network                        
  International Criminal Law                                      
  Minnesota DWI Attorneys                                       
  Worldwide Who's Who of Attorneys                                
  National College of DUI Defense                                
  Minnesota Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers               
  National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers               
  American Bar Association                                       
  Hennepin County Bar Association                                
  Minnesota State Bar Association                                
  University of South Dakota Alumni                                
  Dakota County Bar Association                                    

• Super Lawyer; Minnesota Super Lawyers (2014-2020)
  Top 100 Lawyers; American Society of Legal Advocates (2014-2020)
  Top 100 Trial Lawyers; National Trial Lawyers (2013-2020)
  Worldwide Who's Who; Who's Who Legal (2013)
  Rising Star; Minnesota Super Lawyers (2012)
  Rising Star; Minnesota Super Lawyers (2011)
  Rising Star; Minnesota Super Lawyers (2010)
  Rising Star; Minnesota Super Lawyers (2007)

• State v. David John Sundrum, 2014 Case Conclusion Date:February 10, 2014 Practice Area:DUI / DWI Outcome:The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court noting a lack of evidence in the record to show that the Defendant’s father gave the officer consent to enter the home. Description:The issue appealed concerned whether the arresting officer made an illegal entry into the Defendant’s home while investigating a possible DWI. The District Court had ruled against our client and he had given up hope of victory, but eventually he decided to appeal the decision after consulting with Ethan about the issue and chances of success. This turned out to be the right choice, as Ethan convinced the Court of Appeals to reverse the DWI conviction and remand it to the District Court. The factual scenario was somewhat unique, although officers are always trying to push the envelope when it comes to privacy and individual rights. In this case, the investigating officer came to the Defendant’s address after finding a vehicle registered to him parked in the middle of a nearby intersection with nobody present. After knocking on the front door, the Defendant’s father answered the door and was unsure about whether the Defendant had come home yet that night. He told the officer he was not sure, and the officer asked the father if he would go check inside the house. After he left the front screen door, which closed behind him automatically, the officer entered the home and walked far enough inside to look down the stairway (about 6-10 feet inside the home). The officer claimed that the screen door was left open, which he assumed was a non-verbal invitation to come inside the house. The officer also testified it was cold outside with snow on the ground, leading him to assume that the father would have invited him inside. Plus, the officer testified that it was his “common practice” to step into a home in these situations. The Hennepin County District Court ruled in favor of the State because the judge felt it was reasonable for the officer to assume that he had non-verbal consent to enter the home. Tracey Ernest Wiberg v. Comm'r of Public Safety, 2005 Case Conclusion Date:April 5, 2005 Practice Area:DUI / DWI Outcome:Court of Appeals reversed decision of lower court Description:In this case I argued that my client was not given a full opportunity to consult with an attorney before making his decision about chemical testing. His lack of opportunity was caused by the officer not providing him with any phone books or directory assistance to call an attorney. Upon seeing my client struggle to find an attorney, the officer did nothing to assist my client. The trial court did not believe this was a violation of my client's right to counsel and he appealed. The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's decision, finding that my client's right to an attorney had not been vindicated by the officer. As a result my client's license revocation was rescinded (dismissed). State v. Paul Scott Demars, 2005 Case Conclusion Date:January 18, 2005 Practice Area:DUI / DWI Outcome:Court of Appeals upheld decision of trial court Description:In this case I argued that my client had been illegally seized when police squad cars blocked his car and officers ordered him to get out of his vehicle, which was legally parked in a private apartment complex. The trial court agreed and the prosecutor appealed. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision and the prosecutor sought review from the Minnesota Supreme Court, which denied further review. Case dismissed.

• Appealing a DUI Conviction STAFF PICK
  Ethan Patrick Meaney
  
  Written by Ethan Patrick Meaney Pro
  
  DUI / DWI Attorney
  Contributor Level 20
  
  If you are convicted of driving under the influence (DUI) by a trial court, you still have a right to appeal the court's finding to an appeal (sometimes called appellate) court. This appeal is not automatic. Appellate courts are very strict about when appeals are filed, and the exact details and requirements vary state to state. There is a set period of time within which to file an appeal (often 30 days), and if the appeal is filed even a day late, it will be rejected. You should also know that if you pleaded guilty, there is a much smaller chance of being successful on appeal than if you were found guilty after a trial.
  Appeals review for legal errors
  
  An appeal is very different from a trial. If your trial lawyer does not have experience with appeals, it may be worthwhile to retain an appellate lawyer to handle the appeal. An appeal is not a new trial. A trial court determines the facts of the case and applies the law to them. The appellate court, often a panel of three judges, reviews the prior trial for legal errors by the trial judge. If you and your attorney disagree with a fact that the court found at trial, this will not be overturned on appeal. Only legal issues such as the trial court's application of the proper laws, or rulings on admission of evidence, will be considered by the appellate court.
  Appeals process
  
  The transcript of the trial is sent to the appellate court for review. Your attorney will then file a brief, which tells how the trial court made mistakes and where in the transcript they can be found. The opposing party that prosecuted the case, usually the State, next files a brief that explains why they believe the trial court's decision was correct and should be upheld. Your attorney will then file a reply brief, wherein she can respond to the State's arguments. You should ask your attorney to provide you with copies of all briefs filed during your appeal. After the briefs have been filed, the appellate court may ask both attorneys to appear and present brief oral arguments in support of their positions. This is not always required. Even though the time to file an appeal is short, the time an appellate court takes to decide appeals can take several months. The appellate court can deny the appeal, which means the trial court's verdict is approved. If the appellate court reverses the trial court, this means the verdict is thrown out. The appellate court can then either dismiss the case against you, or remand (which means send it back) to the trial court with instructions on how to correct any errors. In most DUI cases, the court proceedings end after this first appeal. Appeals to a higher court such as a state supreme court are very rare, because most of the time the appellate court must agree that your case is worthwhile and should be appealed again. This does not happen often, but when it does, the process is similar to the first appeal.

Sun.	Mon.	Tue.	Wed.	Thu.	Fri.	Sat.

24/7- 7 Days A Week The Dwi Guys Have Someone To Answer Your Phone Call.

• Twitter
• DWI Guys | LinkedIN
• DWI Guys | Facebook
• DWI Guys | About Us
• DWI Guys | Attorneys
• DWI Guys | Home
• Ethan Meaney | AVVO