Narins Defense
Minnesota Criminal Defense Attorney
Se Habla Español

Recent Cases



STATE vs. W.Y.

Charges: 4th Degree DWI (.12 test result) & Careless driving

Unique Client Concerns: Did not want a DWI on his criminal record or driving record.

Case Details: Stopped for weaving within his lane and speeding. After performing field sobriety tests, officer arrested W.Y. for DWI, and had him submit to a breath test. Result was .12.

Outcome: DWI charges dismissed at settled Evidentiary hearing, Implied Consent (driver’s license) case won. W.Y. does not have a DWI on his criminal record or driving record.

In Re Welfare A.D. (Juvenile)

Charges: Underage Drinking & Driving and Minor Consumption

Unique Client Concerns: Underage Drinking and Driving would go on permanent driving record which could impact A.D.’s goal of becoming a certified mechanic.

Case Details: A.D. stopped for speeding. Officer smelled odor of marijuana and required A.D. to submit to a roadside breath test (PBT). A.D. tested positive for alcohol and was ticketed.

Outcome: Charges Dismissed after Evidentiary Hearing (Officer Unlawfully Administered PBT)

STATE vs. S.K.

Charges: 4th Degree DWI (Test Result .13) (April 2011)

Unique Client Concerns: Client is a Registered Nurse who drives to in-home patient visits. A conviction would result in loss of driver’s license and employment.

Case Details: Officers pulled over client for driving in the vicinity of local bars and for allegedly crossing the center line, which was covered in snow. After an Evidence Suppression hearing and lengthy written briefs, the judge agreed the police unlawfully pulled client over, suppressed all evidence.

Outcome: All Charges Dismissed & Driver’s License Reinstated.

STATE vs. R.R.

Charges: Excessive Speed (July 2012)

Unique Client Concerns: R.R. is a commercial driver. If convicted, R.R. would likely lose job and be unable to support family.

Case Details: Alleged to have been speeding in a residential neighborhood. R.R. was not speeding but the officer testified otherwise.

Outcome: Found Not Guilty at Trial (Aquitted)



STATE vs. S.A.

Charges: Violation of Domestic Assault No Contact Order (DANCO) (Repeat Offense)

Unique Client Concerns: S.A. did not know telephone contact was prohibited.

Case Details: S.A. has been convicted of several domestic related cases and ordered to have no contact with the opposing party. Up until a couple months prior to this incident, S.A. could have telephone contact but not in person contact. A court order was issued restricting telephone contact but S.A. was not made aware of the changes.

Outcome: Charges Dismissed for Lack of Service.

STATE vs. N.S.

Charges: Disorderly Conduct (May 2012)

Unique Client Concerns: N.S. did not initiate the fight so she didn’t feel she did anything wrong or should be charged.

Case Details: N.S. and friend were involved in a bar fight. Although was not the one who started the fight, police charged N.S. with Disorderly Conduct. N.S. represented herself at several court appearances. State’s attorney wanted her to plead guilty as charged. N.S.. then decided to retain Attorney Page Narins.

Outcome: Charges Dismissed Without an Another Court Appearance.

STATE vs. K.A.

Charges: Disorderly Conduct (May 2012)

Unique Client Concerns: K.A. has a completely clear criminal record and feared having a criminal conviction would impact her ability to find a job in the future.

Case Details: K.A. and friend were involved in a bar fight. K.A. sustained injuries requiring hospitalization while trying to break up a fight. Although K.A. was injured while attempting to break up the fight, police charged K.A. with Disorderly Conduct. K.A. represented herself at several court appearances. State’s attorney wanted her to plead guilty. K.A. then decided to retain Attorney Page Narins.

Outcome: Charges Dismissed without another Court Appearance.

STATE vs. J.M.

Charges: Domestic Assault and Disorderly Conduct (October 2011)

Unique Client Concerns: Due to immigration status, if J.M. convicted of assault he would likely be deported.

Case Details: Arrested after being assaulted over customer dispute. Customer refused to pay, started a physical altercation with J.M., and lied to police about who initiated the fight. Defense discovered a video of the incident not collected by law enforcement showing J.M. did not initiate the fight and was acting in self-defense. After several hearings and zealous advocacy by Attorney Page Narins, all charges were dismissed.

Outcome: All Charges Dismissed. J.M. avoided deportation, a criminal record, fines, probation, and serving jail time.

STATE vs. L.B.

Charges: 5th Degree Domestic Assault (June 2011)

Unique Client Concerns: Lost employment until case resolved – if convicted, permanent loss of employment.

Case Details: Client’s ex-girlfriend was angry with client for getting full custody of children. When client went to drop off child’s medication, he heard the children crying. He pushed through the open front door to check on the children. Ex-girlfriend told him to leave and called the police. She lied to the police and said client hit her with the door.

Outcome: Assault Charges Dismissed, Trespass charge continued for 1 year – upon completion of 1 year, the entire case will be dismissed. Client regained employment.

STATE vs. J.B.

Charges: Interfere with 9-1-1 Call (Gross Misdemeanor), 2 Counts – 5th Degree Domestic Assault, Disorderly Conduct (March 2011).

Unique Client Concerns: Works for federal government – could lose job if convicted.

Case Details: Client was intoxicated, belligerent, and in a fight with his brother. While defending himself he hit his brother causing physical injury. Client had significant risk the prosecutor would increase the Assault charge to a felony including significant jail time.

Outcome: All Assault Charges DISMISSED, Interference with 9-1-1 Call DISMISSED, Convicted of Disorderly Conduct, No Jail.

STATE vs. M.M.

Charges: Arrested on suspicion of Felony 2nd Degree Assault with a Deadly Weapon (July 2011)

Unique Client Concerns: Immigration Naturalization documents filed for citizenship and client works as an Occupational Therapist licensed through the State of Minnesota. If convicted, M.M. would not likely qualify for citizenship, could be deported, and would lose her Medical License and employment.

Case Details: After reviewing the case and talking with Attorney Narins, the Hennepin County Attorney rejected charges of 2nd Degree Felony Assault. Client was charged with 5th Degree Domestic Assault. After several hearings, discussions with the prosecutor and exhibiting the determination to go to trial, the State realized they could not prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Outcome: All Charges Dismissed. Client is again eligible for citizenship and will maintain medical license and employment

P.L. vs. T.B.

Charges: Harassment Restraining Order (HRO) and Violation of Harassment Restraining Order. November 2012

Unique Client Concerns: T.B. works in health care and has a clean criminal record. Any court records of violence could impact her employment.

Case Details: Ex-boyfriend started dating a new girlfriend. The new girlfriend wanted to keep T.B. away and to get her fired from health care employment so she made false allegations of harassment. The allegations included a request for a Court issued Harassment Restraining Order and criminal charges for allegedly violating the order by making a phone call to ex-boyfriend.

Outcome: Harassment Restraining Order dismissed when challenged. Criminal charges dismissed.



STATE vs. O.G.

Charges: Expungement – Loiter with Intent to Solicit Prostitution (July 2013)

Unique Client Concerns: O.G. employment requires security clearance for promotions. O.G. was stuck in low level position due to this conviction causing him to fail security clearance.

Case Details: Plead guilty to Loiter with Intent to Solicit Prostitution in 2007

Outcome: Expungement GRANTED – All court records sealed.

STATE vs. K.C.

Charges: Expungement – Disorderly Conduct (Arising from a case where K.C. charged with Domestic Assault x2 and Interference with 911 call) November 2012

Unique Client Concerns: Conviction was causing employment difficulties due to security clearance and background checks.

Case Details: K.C. was charged and convicted after a domestic related argument with a live-in girlfriend in 1998. K.C. made significant steps in rehabilitating his character after the incident date.

Outcome: Expungement GRANTED – all Court / Judicial records and Executive Branch records sealed.

STATE vs. M.P.

Charges: Expungement – 5th Degree Assault Conviction (May 2012)

Unique Client Concerns: M.P. single parent having trouble securing employment and housing due to conviction.

Case Details: M.P. was charged and convicted of 5th Degree Assault in 2008. M.P. was involved in a multi-person fight downtown Minneapolis. M.P. successfully completed probation and did not have additional criminal convictions after the incident.

Outcome: Expungement GRANTED – All Judicial (Court) records and Executive Branch (BCA) records sealed.

STATE vs. P.A.

Charges: Expungement – Convictions: Theft, Underage Consumption (x2), And Vehicle Registration (May-August 2011).

Unique Client Concerns: Denial of military clearance due to criminal convictions.

Outcome: Expungement GRANTED in Waseca County, Expungement GRANTED in Le Sueur County, Expungement GRANTED in Ramsey County.

STATE vs. B.Y.

Charges: Expungement – 5th Degree Domestic Assault conviction (July 2011)

Unique Client Concerns: Client was denied employment and forced to take low-paying positions due to the conviction.

Case Details: Client was charged and convicted of 5th degree domestic assault in 2006. It was a one-time incident where an argument got out of control. He and his wife worked through their issues and currently have a happy, healthy relationship.

Outcome: Expungement GRANTED



STATE vs. S.S.

Charges: 1st Degree Burglary (November 2012)

Unique Client Concerns: S.S. has only a minimal criminal record. S.S.’s employment requires security clearance. S.S. very concerned about serving jail or prison time if convicted.

Case Details: S.S. entered an occupied apartment uninvited and destroyed some property during a fight with occupant. What State’s attorney didn’t realize is that S.S. stayed at apartment occassionally and was entering to get property back. Occupant did not invite S.S. in and started a fight when S.S. inside. Items were broken during the altercation.

Outcome: 1st Degree Burglary dismissed. S.S. acknowledged property damage and took responsibility for minor damage. No jail and only minimal fines.

STATE vs. T.S.

Charges: Theft (May 2011)

Unique Client Concerns: Immigrant pursuing citizenship. Conviction is considered a Crime of Moral Turpitude and could disqualify client from becoming a citizen.

Case Details: Client stole merchandise from a store and was charged with Misdemeanor Theft.

Outcome: Case Dismissed after $100 fine paid.



STATE vs. J.H.

Charges: 5th Degree Controlled Substance (Possession of 2 lbs. Marijuana) (October 2011)

Unique Client Concerns: Felony conviction would result in loss of employment and a family heirloom gold spoon was seized by police during search.

Case Details: Client received a shipment of marijuana which was stopped at the airport. Police orchestrated a controlled delivery. Once client signed for package, police executed a search warrant and found the 2 lb. package of marijuana opened by client. Police also seized a family heirloom large gold spoon (Value Aprox. $5,000). Client charged with felony drug possession and faced up to 5 years in prison and up to a $10,000 fine.

Outcome: Adjudication of the felony conviction stayed (no felony conviction during probation). The heirloom spoon was returned by the Sherriff’s department. After client serves 34 days jail and follows requirements of probation the case will be completely DISMISSED.



STATE vs. T.B.

Charges: City Ordinance Violations (November 2012)

Unique Client Concerns: T.B. was being bullied by city officials for several years. He was tired of simply paying tickets even though he had done nothing wrong. T.B. took a stand.

Case Details: T.B. was cited with violating a Junk Vehicle Ordinance for having a collector van in his driveway while his adult son restored the van. Due to the van not having current tabs / registration, the officer gave him 2 weeks to comply or be cited. T.B. complied and obtained collector plates only days later. Although in compliance, officer still issued T.B. a ticket. T.B. represented himself at several court appearances with no success. He hired Attorney Page Narins to help him have his voice heard.

Outcome: Charge dismissed for lack of probable cause

STATE vs. T.D.

Charges: Loiter with Intent to Solicit Prostitution (September 2013)

Unique Client Concerns: Employment requires background check. If convicted, T.D. would likely lose employment (working for same company for 18 years)

Case Details: T.D. was cruising around an area of known prostitution, late at night, just listening to music. Police became suspicious, stopped T.D., and after finding nothing else, issued T.D. a ticket for loitering with intent to solicit prostitution.

Outcome: Charge Dismissed due to Lack of Evidence.