Mike Brandt’s client was charged with DWI in February 2016 in the City of Ramsey. In going through the case, Mike noticed several irregularities with the basis for the stop of his client and also brought up the fact that there was very little evidence that his client was impaired. Mike also had his client immediately obtain a chemical health...
Mike Brandt’s client was being investigated for some alleged financial improprieties when he was working at a school. The School District, as well as the police, claimed that he had misappropriated funds from a Booster Club at his school. The client hired Mike before charges were issued to help him avoid charges. In preparing the case, Mike went through the...
Mike’s client was a passenger in her own motor vehicle when another person was driving the car and was stopped for a DWI. Because of the driver’s prior record, the vehicle was subject to forfeiture. Mike attempted to negotiate a settlement with the State, but they would not deal so Mike took the case to trial. A hearing was conducted...
Mike Brandt’s client was charged with Domestic Assault from an incident occurring in Anoka County in January, 2016. As part of his preparation of the case, Mike provided the prosecutor with documentation that his client was suffering from significant mental health issues and was dealing with them through the mental health system. Mike argued to the prosecutor that the criminal...
Mike Brandt’s client was charged with a DWI based upon an arrest emanating from some improper driving conduct. Mike’s client was stopped by the police, failed Field Sobriety Testing, and submitted to an alcohol breath test at the police station. Throughout the course of his representation, Mike challenged how the vehicle was stopped, and challenged the propriety of the Field...
Mike Brandt’s client was charged with DWI in Anoka County from April 2016. In preparing this case, Mike challenged the basis upon which the police initially stopped his client. Not only did Mike conduct a thorough investigation into the police reports, he also personally visited the area where his client was stopped and obtained photographs showing some nuances of the roadway.
Mike conducted a hearing where he argued to the judge that the stop of his client’s vehicle was illegal as there was no improper driving conduct based upon the configuration of the road. The judge agreed with Mike, ruled the stop was illegal, and threw out the license revocation.
Mike Brandt’s client was arrested for possessing controlled substances in Chisago County in November 2014. Throughout the course of this case, Mike challenged the propriety of the search of his client’s vehicle and developed a theory of defense whereby Mike intended to show at trial his client did not actually possess the controlled substances but that they were unwittingly left in his vehicle. Prior to the beginning of trial, the prosecutor recognized issues with his case and agreed to a resolution whereby Mike’s client entered a plea, but the plea would not be accepted by the judge and his client would be placed on six months probation.
Mike Brandt’s client was charged in March, 2016 with Felony Theft for inappropriately putting discount price tags on merchandise at a store where he was employed and then buying the merchandise at a discounted value. The value of the misappropriated property was over $1,000 and Mike’s client was charged with Felony Theft in Hennepin County. A Felony Theft conviction would...
Mike Brandt’s client was arrested in Hennepin County in 2015 when she was caught with a substantial amount of methamphetamine. The charges against his client would have resulted in an executed prison sentence of 48 months. However, in preparing the case, Mike had his client obtain a chemical dependency evaluation and made sure that she got into a treatment program....
Mike Brandt’s client was charged with stalking and domestic assault for an incident occurring in approximately September of 2015. In preparation for trial, Mike conducted an investigation in to the alleged victim, compiled numerous communications between the alleged victim and the defendant, and convinced the prosecutor that there was not a basis to move forward. Prior to the start of...