Archives

State v. Caldwell

Case Type: Murder / Homicide

Case Title: State v. Caldwell

Charges: Murder 2nd Degree

Jurisdiction: St. Paul, Ramsey County, Minnesota

Case Results: ACQUITTAL

Case Summary: Ms. Caldwell was charged with four counts of Murder 2nd Degree and three counts of Manslaughter in the death of her 3-year old child.  Mr. Whitlock’s dissection and thorough review of the evidence revealed a third party perpetrator in Ms. Caldwell’s case.  The comprehensive research of Mr. Whitlock’s legal defense team provided Mr. Whitlock with key information he was able to use when conducting his cross-examination of the medical experts.  This evidence confirmed Mr. Whitlock’s theory that the third party perpetrator’s   actions led to the accidental death of Ms. Caldwell’s child.  Ms. Caldwell was acquitted on all seven counts.  Ms. Caldwell is a wonderful young lady and was absolutely innocent.  We pray she is able to put this matter behind her and find success in her life.  May God bless her and her family. The co-Defendant who was represented by different counsel was convicted in the case.  Although it is Mr. Whitlock’s belief, and the investigation proved, the co-Defendant did not cause the injuries to the child.

State v. Ahmed

Case Type: Murder / Homicide

Case Title: State v. Ahmed

Charges: Murder 2nd Degree

Jurisdiction: St. Paul, Ramsey County, Minnesota

Case Results: DISMISSAL

Case Summary: Mr. Ahmed was charged with Murder 2nd Degree and Aiding an Offender in a St. Paul shooting resulting in the death of an individual who was attempting to rob Mr. Ahmed and the passenger/co-Defendant of his vehicle.  Mr. Ahmed’s passenger shot the deceased while the deceased and a companion attempted to rob Mr. Ahmed and his passenger.  Mr. Whitlock argued Mr. Ahmed had a right to defend himself and flee the scene, if he believed he was being robbed at gunpoint.  The court ruled in favor of Mr. Ahmed stating he was innocent and acted in self-defense.  Mr. Ahmed did not receive any jail time (after turning himself in and making bail) as a result of this charge.

The co-Defendant who was represented by different counsel decided not to risk trial and plead guilty to Manslaughter.

State V. Blackwell

Criminal / Sexual Conduct Crime

Case Title: State v. Blackwell

Charges: Criminal Sexual Conduct 1st Degree, Kidnapping

Jurisdiction: St. Paul, Ramsey County, Minnesota

Case Results: ACQUITTAL

Case Summary: Dr. Blackwell, a physicist, was charged with two counts of Criminal Sexual Conduct 1st Degree, two counts of Kidnapping, Assault 2nd Degree – Dangerous Weapon and Domestic Assault by Strangulation involving his wife.  During a disagreement between Dr. Blackewll and his wife, a physical altercation ensued.  Mr. Whitlock successfully convinced the jury Dr. Blackwell acted in self-defense.  Dr. Blackwell was acquitted on all six counts.  With no prior criminal record, Dr. Blackwell was facing a mandatory minimum of 144 months (12 years) in prison but had the potential to face more time based on the alleged use of a dangerous weapon and claimed injuries to the now discredited alleged victim.  We pray Dr. Blackwell is able to restore his life and continue his career as an engineer, physics professor and mentor.

State V. Hobbs

Case Type: Assault

Case Title: State v. Hobbs

Charges: Assault 2nd Degree- Dangerous Weapon

Jurisdiction: St. Paul, Ramsey County, Minnesota

Case Results: ACQUITTAL

Case Summary: Mr. Hobbs was charged with seven counts of Assault 2nd Degree-Dangerous Weapon arising out of a situation with an individual who had borrowed his vehicle but refused to return it.  Mr. Hobbs contacted the St. Paul Police Department who refused to assist Mr. Hobbs in the recovery of his vehicle due to his alleged gang ties.  In fact, the police officer involved taunted Mr. Hobbs and told him to get his own vehicle back.  Consequently, Mr. Hobbs felt compelled to recover his own vehicle.  Mr. Whitlock successfully convinced a jury in what some have described as the best closing argument ever that since the authorities were unwilling to assist Mr. Hobbs in retrieving his property, he had a right to repossess the property himself.  The jurors returned Not Guilty verdicts on all 14 counts of Assault 2nd Degree.  Mr. Hobbs was facing 147 months (12.3 years) in prison.

State V. McClellan

Case Type: Assault

Case Title: State v. McClellan 

Charges: Assault 2nd Degree- Dangerous Weapon, Terroristic Threats

Jurisdiction: St. Paul, Ramsey County, Minnesota

Case Results: ACQUITTAL

Case Summary:

Mr. McCllelan was facing two counts of Assault 2nd –Dangerous Weapon, False Imprisonment-Intentional Restraint, Terroristic Threats – Reckless Disregard Risk charges arising out of a domestic related incident.  Police responded to a call for help from the alleged victim.  After arriving at the scene, police recovered narcotics which they attributed to Mr. McClellan.  Mr. Whitlock gave a hard hitting defense and the jury acquitted Mr. McClellan on all four charges.

The state added two drug related charges to the Complaint against Mr. McClellan just before trial.  While Mr. McClellan was found guilty of the drug related charges, Mr. Whitlock successfully convinced a three judge panel to sever the drug charges from the assault related charges.  (Please see Mr. McClellan’s appellate case details under State Appeals).

State v. Faulkner

Case Type: Assault

Case Title: State v. Faulkner

Charges: Felony, Domestic Assault, Probation Violation

Jurisdiction: Burnsville, Dakota County, Minnesota

Case Results: ACQUITTAL

Case Summary:  Mr. Faulkner was charged with Felony Domestic Assault, misdemeanor Criminal Damage to Property 4th Degree and a Probation Violation.  Mr. Faulkner allegedly assaulted his child’s mother, after kicking her door off the hinges to gain access to her apartment.  The now discredited alleged victim gave inconsistent accounts of what actually took place.  After a vigorous cross- examination by Mr. Whitlock exposing her animus toward Mr. Faulkner and her inconsistent statements, the jury acquitted Mr. Faulkner of the Felony Domestic Assault charge.  However, the jury did convict Mr. Faulkner of the misdemeanor Criminal Damage to Property charge.  Mr. Faulkner was sentenced immediately after the jury verdict.  The misdemeanor conviction meant Mr. Faulkner was in violation of the terms of his probation.  Mr. Whitlock successfully argued the court should not violate Mr. Faulkner’s probation.  Mr. Faulkner did not receive any jail time for the probation violation.  Mr. Faulkner was facing 60 months (5 years) in prison.

State v. Blair

Case Type: Gun Crime 

Case Title: State v. Blair

Charges: Prohibited Person in Possession of a Firearm

Jurisdiction: Minneapolis, Hennepin County, Minnesota

Case Results: DISMISSAL

Case Summary:  Mr. Blair was charged with Prohibited Person in Possession of a Firearm (felon in possession of a firearm).  Mr. Blair along with friends and family were sitting in a vehicle in front of a relative’s home talking and hanging out.  The relative who lived at the home was standing outside of the vehicle talking with Mr. Blair and the vehicle passengers.  A neighbor in the area was concerned about this group of young African American men and called the police.  The neighborhood was multiracial but predominately white.  The Minneapolis police arrived at the scene in response to the call.  Without inquiring of Mr. Blair, his family member who lived at the home, or any of the passengers in the vehicle the police conducted a felony stop procedure with guns drawn.  All of the individuals were pulled out of the vehicle and lined up with the relative who lived at the address.  An illegal search of the vehicle was conducted where a gun was recovered.  The police alleged that Mr. Blair possessed the gun since it was found near the location where he was sitting.  He was subsequently arrested and held in jail until the court’s decision.  Mr. Whitlock argued that Mr. Blair was stopped and searched illegally by the police violating his 4th Amendment constitutional right to be free from illegal searches and seizures.  The court agreed with Mr. Whitlock and the evidence (firearm) discovered was suppressed and the case against Mr. Blair was dismissed.  Mr. Blair was facing a mandatory minimum of 60 months (5 years) in prison.

State V. Price

Case Type: Assault

Case Title: State v. Price

Charges: Assault 3rd Degree, Domestic Assault

Jurisdiction: Burnsville, Dakota County, Minnesota

Case Results: ACQUITTAL

Case Summary:

Case Summary:  Mr. Price was charged with Assault 3rd Degree and Domestic Assault involving his wife.  The Burnsville Police Department alleged that Mr. Price threw a candle holder striking his wife in the face leaving a permanent scar.  His wife testified at trial that she threw the candle holder at Mr. Price who used his forearm to block it away which then caused it to break and return fragments back toward her.  Mr. Whitlock convinced a jury to acquit Mr. Price of all charges.  Mr. Price was facing 98 months (8.2 years) in prison.

State v. Mallett

Case Type: Drug Crime

Case Title: State v. Mallett

Charges: Violation of Controlled Substance – Possession 2nd Degree

Jurisdiction: Brooklyn Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota

Case Results: DISMISSAL

Case Summary:  Mr. Mallett was charged with Violation of Controlled Substance – Possession 2nd Degree.  Mr. Mallett had an extended rental car contract.  Due to the extended rental, he was taking the car to the rental agency’s auto shop to get an oil change.  The rental agency and auto shop were located next door to one another.  While waiting for service at the auto shop, Mr. Mallett left the vehicle running and walked over to the rental agency.  One of the auto shop employees thought Mr. Mallett was acting suspicious and called the Brooklyn Park police.  The police arrived at the auto shop while Mr. Mallett was still at the rental agency.  While checking the running vehicle, the officer alleges that he smelled marijuana emanating from the vehicle.  The police drove next door to make contact with Mr. Mallett.  Mr. Mallett was at the counter adding additional time to his extended rental when the police walked in and told him to put his hands up.  The police officer proceeded to grab Mr. Mallett and began searching his person.  While digging in Mr. Mallett’s pockets, the officer recovered what appeared to be narcotics.  Mr. Mallett was arrested and held in custody until the court made its decision.  Mr. Whitlock argued that Mr. Mallett was stopped and searched illegally by the police violating his 4th Amendment constitutional right to be free from illegal searches and seizures.  The court agreed with Mr. Whitlock and the evidence (narcotics) discovered was suppressed and the case against Mr. Mallett was dismissed.  If convicted Mr. Mallett was facing 88 months (7.4 years) in prison.

 

 

State v. Pellerin

Case Type: Drug Crime

Case Title: State v. Pellerin  

Charges: Violation of Controlled Substance – Possession 2nd Degree

Jurisdiction: St. Paul, Ramsey County, Minnesota

Case Results: DISMISSAL

Case Summary: Mr. Pellerin was charged with Violation of Controlled Substance Crime – Possession 2nd Degree.  Mr. Pellerin was accused of selling drugs at a local St. Paul bar.  The informant told the police a nickname alleged to be Mr. Pellerin and gave the police Mr. Pellerin’s license plate number.  The police took the information and based on the plate information located Mr. Pellerin’s apartment.  The police conducted a dog sniff with a police K9 outside Mr. Pellerin’s apartment in order to support their request for a search warrant.  Mr. Pellerin’s apartment was searched pursuant to the search warrant.  Mr. Whitlock successfully argued that the evidence seized in Mr. Pellerin’s case should be suppressed due to police violating his 4th Amendment constitutional right to be free from illegal searches and seizures and that the police did not have a sufficient nexus (connection) between the alleged drug sales at the bar and Mr. Pellerin’s home.  Mr. Whitlock also argued there was not articulable suspicion or probable cause to justify the dog sniff of Mr. Pellerin’s apartment.  The court agreed with Mr. Whitlock and the evidence (narcotics) discovered was suppressed and the case against Mr. Pellerin was dismissed.  If convicted, Mr. Pellerin was facing 57 months (4.75 years) in prison.

State v. Doering

Case Title: State v. Doering

Charges: DWI 4th Degree – Under Influence – Controlled Substance

Jurisdiction: Olivia, Renville County, Minnesota

Case Results: DISMISSAL

Case Summary: Mr. Doering was charged with DWI 4th Degree-Under Influence-Controlled Substance.  Mr. Doering was accused of ingesting drugs which impaired his ability to drive.  Mr. Doering was allegedly stopped for speeding.  However, the stop morphed into a drug investigation.  Mr. Whitlock argued that the stop and search by the police was illegal and violated Mr. Doering’s 4th Amendment constitutional right to be free from illegal searches and seizures.  The court agreed with Mr. Whitlock and the evidence (DUI – drugs) discovered was suppressed and the case against Mr. Doering was dismissed.

 

State v. McClellan

Case Type: State Appeal

Case Title: State v. McClellan 

Charges: Violation of Controlled Substance Crime – Sale and Possession 1st Degree

Jurisdiction: Minnesota Court of Appeals

Case Results: REVERSED AND REMANDED

Case Summary: Mr. McClellan was charged with two counts of Violation of Controlled Substance Crime – Sale and Possession 1stDegree.  Mr. McClellan was acquitted by the jury of the sale charge but convicted of the possession charge.  Mr. McClellan received a 120 months (10 years) prison sentence by the court.  The 120 months was the high end of the Sentencing Guidelines box.  (Please see Mr. McClellan’s case details under Assaults).  Mr. Whitlock appealed the conviction and trial judge’s sentence.  On appeal, Mr. Whitlock successfully argued to a three judge panel to over-turn the conviction and trial judge’s sentence.  The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the drug conviction for a new trial due to improper joinder with the assault related offenses.  Unfortunately, Mr. McClellan was required to serve prison time while Mr. Whitlock appealed the case.  Once the case was sent back to the district court, Mr. McClellan requested that Mr. Whitlock negotiate a sentence to give him credit for the time he already served in prison instead of a new trial.  The negotiation was successful.

State v. Balsimo

Case Type: DUI / DWI

Case Title: State v. Balsimo

Charges: Criminal Vehicular Homicide, DWI 4th Degree

Jurisdiction: Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota

Case Results: PROBATION

Case Summary: Ms. Balsimo was facing Criminal Vehicular Homicide and DWI 4th Degree charges.  Ms. Balsimo and her best friend went out for a night of fun.  During the evening, both of them consumed a number of drinks.  Unfortunately, they did not have a designated driver.  After having what was otherwise considered a great evening, Ms. Balsimo made a bad decision to drive the two home.  While driving, Ms. Balsimo lost control of the vehicle which flipped multiple times causing the death of her best friend.  Ms. Balsimo decided not to put the victim’s family through a trial and plead guilty to Criminal Vehicular Homicide.  The Sentencing Guidelines directed the court to give Ms. Balsimo a prison sentence of 48 months (4 years).  Mr. Whitlock was able to convince the judge to sentence Ms. Balsimo, the mother of two young children, to 6 months in jail and probation for a term of 10 years.

State v. Doering

Case Type: DWI / DUI

Case Title: State v. Doering

Charges: DWI 4th Degree – Under Influence – Controlled Substance

Jurisdiction: Olivia, Renville County, Minnesota

Case Results: DISMISSAL

Case Summary: Mr. Doering was charged with DWI 4th Degree-Under Influence-Controlled Substance.  Mr. Doering was accused of ingesting drugs which impaired his ability to drive.  Mr. Doering was allegedly stopped for speeding.  However, the stop morphed into a drug investigation.  Mr. Whitlock argued that the stop and search by the police was illegal and violated Mr. Doering’s 4th Amendment constitutional right to be free from illegal searches and seizures.  The court agreed with Mr. Whitlock and the evidence (DUI – drugs) discovered was suppressed and the case against Mr. Doering was dismissed.

USA v. Vang

Case Type: Federal

Case Title: USA v. Vang

Charges: Conspiracy to Distribute Controlled Substance

Jurisdiction: United States District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin

Case Results: PROBATION

Case Summary: Mr. Vang was charged with transferring a firearm with knowledge it would be used in a drug trafficking offense.  Mr. Vang was alleged to be a member of a Hmong drug trafficking organization distributing drugs throughout the United States.  He was also considered to be the gun purchaser and distributor for the organization.  Mr. Vang was also personally accused of being a distributor of ecstasy, although the organization was accused of distributing multiple forms of narcotics.  The alleged illegal enterprise had main hubs in California, Colorado, Minnesota, North Carolina and Wisconsin.  Mr. Vang was arrested by federal agents regarding his role in the alleged organization in Minnesota.  Mr. Whitlock was able to secure his release while the matter was litigated.  Mr. Whitlock also successfully convinced a federal judge of Mr. Vang’s minor role in the alleged illegal enterprise.  Ultimately, the judge agreed with Mr. Whitlock and sentenced Mr. Vang to probation for a term of 4 years.  Mr. Vang was facing at least 10 years in prison if convicted of the conspiracy related charges.  He was also facing additional time had the government pursued the gun distribution allegations.