Recording, Filing of Forged Instrument

Defending Against Charges of Recording or Filing Forged Instruments in the Minneapolis-St. Paul Metro Area: Understanding Minnesota Statute § 609.64

An accusation of recording or filing a forged instrument in Minnesota is a grave matter, carrying the potential for severe legal repercussions that can affect an individual’s liberty, financial stability, and future opportunities. This offense, as defined under Minnesota state law, involves knowingly submitting a false or forged document related to real or personal property to a public office for official recording or filing. For individuals residing in the Twin Cities metropolitan area, including Minneapolis, St. Paul, Hennepin County, Ramsey County, and the surrounding Minnesota counties, a clear comprehension of this charge and its implications is vital. The legal framework is precise, and the prosecution must prove each element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. A conviction can lead to felony penalties, making a well-considered and strategic defense essential.

The essence of this crime lies in the intentional act of introducing a fraudulent document into the public record, thereby undermining the integrity of systems designed to authenticate and track property rights and interests. Such instruments can range from deeds and mortgages to liens and other official papers that, if genuine, would have legal standing concerning property. Those facing allegations of violating Minnesota Statute § 609.64 in jurisdictions like Hennepin or Ramsey County must understand what constitutes an “intentional presentation,” a “false or forged instrument,” and how the document’s relation to “real or personal property” is assessed. Successfully navigating these complex charges requires not only a thorough grasp of the statute but also an awareness of how these cases are prosecuted and defended within the local legal landscape.

Minnesota Statute § 609.64: The Law Governing Recording or Filing of Forged Instruments

Minnesota state law specifically criminalizes the act of recording or filing a forged instrument relating to property in a public office under Statute § 609.64. This statute clearly defines the prohibited conduct and establishes the potential penalties. A precise understanding of this legal provision is fundamental for anyone accused of this offense within Minneapolis, St. Paul, or anywhere else in Minnesota.

609.64 RECORDING, FILING OF FORGED INSTRUMENT.

Whoever intentionally presents for filing, registering, or recording, or files, registers, or records a false or forged instrument relating to or affecting real or personal property in a public office entitled to file, register, or record such instrument when genuine may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than three years or to payment of a fine of not more than $5,000, or both.

History: 1963 c 753 art 1 s 609.64; 1984 c 628 art 3 s 11

Essential Elements of Filing a Forged Instrument in Minnesota Courts

For the state to successfully prosecute an individual for recording or filing a forged instrument in Minnesota, particularly within the court systems of Hennepin County, Ramsey County, or other parts of the Twin Cities metro area, the prosecution bears the heavy burden of proving every single essential element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. If the prosecution fails to establish even one of these elements, a conviction cannot be legally sustained. A diligent defense will meticulously examine the state’s evidence concerning each component, looking for deficiencies, contradictions, or alternative explanations that can create the necessary reasonable doubt. Comprehending these elements is a critical first step for anyone facing such serious allegations.

• Intentionally Presents for Filing, Registering, or Recording, or Files, Registers, or Records: The prosecution must prove that the accused acted with specific intent. This means the act of presenting, filing, registering, or recording the instrument was a deliberate and purposeful action, not an accident or a mistake. The term “intentionally” under Minnesota law typically means that the actor either has a purpose to do the thing or cause the result specified or believes that the act, if successful, will cause that result. It’s not enough that the document was filed; the state must show the defendant was the one who, with intent, caused it to be submitted to the public office. This element focuses on the mental state accompanying the physical act of submission.
• A False or Forged Instrument: This element requires the state to demonstrate that the document in question was not genuine. A “false instrument” might be one that is entirely fabricated or one that contains false information material to its purpose. A “forged instrument” typically involves a document that is falsely made or altered, such as by signing another person’s name without authority or changing the terms of an existing document. The prosecution must provide evidence that the instrument itself was counterfeit, fraudulent, or materially untrue, and that the defendant knew of its false or forged nature when presenting it. The specific characteristics that render the document false or forged are central to this element.
• Relating to or Affecting Real or Personal Property: The instrument submitted must have a connection to either real property (land and anything permanently attached to it, like buildings) or personal property (movable possessions). This could include documents like deeds, mortgages, liens, titles, bills of sale, or any other legal paper that purports to create, transfer, modify, or extinguish an interest or right in a specific piece of property. If the document, even if false or forged, does not pertain to or affect property rights, then a charge under this specific statute may not be appropriate. The scope of “relating to or affecting” can be broad, but a clear nexus to property must be established.
• In a Public Office Entitled to File, Register, or Record Such Instrument When Genuine: The act of filing or recording must occur at a legitimate public office that has the authority to accept and maintain such documents as part of the official public record if they were genuine. This typically refers to offices like a County Recorder’s office, Registrar of Titles, or other governmental agencies responsible for maintaining property records. Presenting a forged document to a private entity or an office without the proper authority to record it would not satisfy this element of the crime under Minnesota Statute § 609.64. The legitimacy of the office and its function in the context of property records is key.

Penalties for Filing Forged Instruments in Minnesota: Understanding the Stakes in the Twin Cities

A conviction for recording or filing a forged instrument under Minnesota Statute § 609.64 is a felony offense and carries substantial legal penalties. The statute itself clearly outlines the potential consequences, underscoring the seriousness with which the state views the act of corrupting public property records. Individuals convicted of this crime in Minneapolis, St. Paul, or anywhere in Minnesota face the possibility of significant prison time, hefty fines, or both. These direct penalties are in addition to the lasting impact of a felony conviction on one’s criminal record, which can affect employment, housing, and civil rights for years to come.

Felony Sanctions Under Minnesota Statute § 609.64

Minnesota Statute § 609.64 explicitly states the penalties for this offense. An individual found guilty of intentionally presenting for filing, registering, or recording, or actually filing, registering, or recording a false or forged instrument relating to real or personal property in an appropriate public office “may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than three years or to payment of a fine of not more than $5,000, or both.” This designation makes the crime a felony under Minnesota law. The court has discretion in determining the exact sentence within these statutory limits, considering factors such as the nature of the offense, the defendant’s prior criminal history, and any mitigating or aggravating circumstances present in the case. The potential for a multi-year prison sentence highlights the severity of the charge.

Real-World Examples of Forged Instrument Filing in the Twin Cities Metro Area

The crime of recording or filing a forged instrument can occur in various contexts, often involving attempts to fraudulently claim ownership of property, encumber property with false debts, or otherwise deceive public record-keeping systems for personal gain. For residents of Minneapolis, St. Paul, and the surrounding Minnesota communities, understanding concrete examples can help illustrate how Minnesota Statute § 609.64 is applied in practice. The core of the offense is the intentional submission of a known false or forged document related to property to an official public office.

These scenarios frequently involve a level of sophistication or knowledge of legal documents and public filing procedures. The “instrument” itself must be false or forged, and the individual filing it must do so with the intent to have it entered into the public record, knowing its fraudulent nature. The impact of such filings can be severe, potentially clouding titles to property, creating fictitious liabilities, and causing significant legal and financial distress for legitimate property owners. The following examples depict situations where charges for recording or filing a forged instrument might arise in Minnesota.

Example: Filing a Forged Quitclaim Deed in Hennepin County

An individual in Hennepin County might forge the signature of a property owner on a quitclaim deed, a document used to transfer interest in real estate. The forger then takes this fraudulent deed to the Hennepin County Recorder’s Office and intentionally presents it for recording. If recorded, this forged deed would falsely suggest that the legitimate owner has transferred their property rights to the forger or another party. The “instrument” is the quitclaim deed, which is “forged” due to the unauthorized signature. It clearly “relates to real property.” The act of “presenting for recording” at the County Recorder’s office, a “public office entitled to record such instrument,” with knowledge of the forgery, would constitute a violation of § 609.64.

Example: Recording a Fictitious Mechanic’s Lien on Property in St. Paul

Imagine a disgruntled contractor in St. Paul who was not hired for a job, or who performed substandard work and was not paid the full amount they demanded. To retaliate or extort money, the contractor fabricates a mechanic’s lien document, falsely claiming that the property owner owes them a substantial sum for labor or materials that were never provided or were not legitimate. The contractor then knowingly files this “false instrument” with the Ramsey County Recorder’s office. This lien, though fraudulent, could encumber the property, making it difficult for the owner to sell or refinance. The “instrument” is the mechanic’s lien, “false” because the debt is fabricated. It “relates to real property” and is filed in an appropriate “public office.” This action, done intentionally, fits the crime.

Example: Submitting a Counterfeit Mortgage Satisfaction Document in Ramsey County

A person in Ramsey County owes a significant amount on a mortgage. To make it appear as though the mortgage has been paid off, they create a counterfeit “Satisfaction of Mortgage” document, forging the signatures of bank officials. They then intentionally file this “forged instrument” with the county office responsible for recording such documents. If accepted, this could fraudulently remove the legitimate mortgage lien from the property records, potentially allowing the individual to sell the property as if it were unencumbered or secure further loans against it. The “instrument” is the satisfaction of mortgage, “forged” with fake signatures. It “affects real property” and is filed in a “public office.” This would be a clear violation.

Example: Filing a Forged Bill of Sale for a Valuable Personal Property Item in Anoka County

Consider a scenario in Anoka County where an individual wants to fraudulently claim ownership of a valuable piece of personal property, such as a classic car or expensive equipment, that belongs to someone else. They create a “false” bill of sale, perhaps by forging the owner’s signature or inventing a fictitious seller, indicating that the property was sold to them. They then attempt to file or register this “false instrument” with a public office that might record such transactions for personal property (if such an office exists and is entitled to record such an instrument for that type of property, like the Department of Public Safety for vehicle titles). The “instrument” is the bill of sale, “false or forged.” It “relates to personal property.” If filed intentionally in an appropriate “public office,” this could constitute the offense.

Defending Against Forged Instrument Filing Charges in Minneapolis and Surrounding Counties

When an individual is accused of recording or filing a forged instrument in Minneapolis, St. Paul, or any of the surrounding Minnesota counties like Dakota, Anoka, or Washington, it is crucial to recognize that an accusation is merely the beginning of a legal process, not its conclusion. The prosecution is tasked with the substantial burden of proving every component of Minnesota Statute § 609.64 beyond a reasonable doubt. A proactive and strategically crafted defense is essential to challenge the state’s case. This involves a detailed analysis of the evidence, identification of procedural errors or constitutional violations, and the assertion of all applicable legal defenses under Minnesota law.

A successful defense in these types of cases often hinges on dissecting the elements of intent, the nature of the instrument itself, its connection to property, and the character of the office where it was filed. Given the felony status of this crime and the severe potential penalties, including imprisonment and substantial fines, the importance of a robust defense cannot be overstated. An attorney knowledgeable in Minnesota criminal law will explore every avenue, from factual disputes about the defendant’s knowledge or actions to legal arguments about the interpretation of the statute. The objective is to protect the defendant’s rights, reputation, and freedom by aiming for the most favorable outcome, be it a dismissal, an acquittal, or a significant reduction in charges or penalties.

Defense: Lack of Intent

A critical element the prosecution must prove is that the defendant acted “intentionally.” This defense strategy focuses on demonstrating that the defendant did not possess the requisite criminal intent when the instrument was presented or filed.

• Mistake or Accident: The defendant may have presented or filed the document due to a genuine mistake or accident, without knowing it was false or forged, or without intending for a known false document to be officially recorded. For instance, an employee might file a document prepared by someone else, unaware of its fraudulent nature.
• No Knowledge of Falsity/Forgery: If the defendant genuinely believed the instrument was authentic and legitimate at the time of filing, they would lack the necessary intent. The defense would present evidence showing the defendant had no reason to suspect the document was false or forged.
• Duress or Coercion: In rare circumstances, a defendant might argue they were forced or coerced into filing the document by another party, thereby negating their voluntary intent. This requires showing that the defendant acted under an imminent threat of harm.

Defense: Instrument Not False or Forged

This defense challenges the prosecution’s assertion that the instrument itself meets the definition of “false or forged” as contemplated by the statute. The nuances of what constitutes a legally false or forged document are critical here.

• Instrument is Genuine or Truthful: The defense may present evidence showing the document is, in fact, authentic or that the information it contains is accurate. Disagreements over the interpretation or implications of a genuine document do not make the document itself false or forged.
• Alteration Was Authorized or Immaterial: If the instrument was altered, the defense might argue the alteration was authorized by the relevant parties or that the alteration was so minor or immaterial that it did not render the document “false or forged” in a way that impacts its legal validity concerning property rights.
• Not a Forgery in the Legal Sense: The definition of forgery involves specific legal requirements. The defense might argue that while the document might be problematic in some way, it does not meet the strict legal definition of a “forged instrument” under Minnesota law (e.g., it was not falsely made or altered in a way that purports to be the act of another who did not authorize the act).

Defense: Instrument Did Not Relate to or Affect Real or Personal Property

Minnesota Statute § 609.64 specifically requires that the filed instrument “relat[es] to or affect[s] real or personal property.” If the document does not have this necessary connection, the charge cannot be sustained.

• No Nexus to Property: The defense would argue that the document, even if problematic, does not pertain to any identifiable real or personal property. For example, filing a false academic transcript, while potentially criminal under other statutes, would not fall under § 609.64 because it doesn’t relate to property.
• Connection Too Tenuous: The relationship to property might be argued as too indirect or speculative to meet the statutory requirement. The instrument must have a reasonably direct bearing on rights, title, or interests in property.
• Property Interest Not Covered: The type of “property interest” affected might be argued as outside the scope of what the statute intends to protect, though this is a more nuanced legal argument.

Defense: Not a Public Office Entitled to Record or Instrument Not Genuinely Recordable

The statute requires the filing to be in “a public office entitled to file, register, or record such instrument when genuine.” This defense challenges whether the office or the nature of the document meets this criterion.

• Wrong Type of Office: The document might have been presented to a public office that does not have the legal authority or function to record instruments of that nature relating to property. For example, filing a purported property deed with the Department of Health.
• Instrument Not of a Type Genuinely Recorded: Even if the office is generally correct (e.g., County Recorder), the specific type of false or forged document submitted might not be one that the office would be “entitled” to record even if it were genuine, perhaps because it doesn’t meet basic formal requirements for recordable instruments (aside from its falsity).
• Private Entity or Non-Official Submission: If the document was submitted to a private entity, or in a context that doesn’t constitute official “filing, registering, or recording” for public record purposes, this element would not be met.

Minnesota Forged Instrument Filing FAQs for Twin Cities Residents

If you are facing allegations of recording or filing a forged instrument in Minnesota, you likely have many questions. This section addresses common concerns for individuals in Minneapolis, St. Paul, and the surrounding metro area who are navigating these serious charges.

What does “intentionally” mean in the context of Minnesota Statute § 609.64?

Under Minnesota law, “intentionally” generally means that the person either had a purpose to commit the act (e.g., to file the document) or believed that the act, if successful, would cause the prohibited result. For this crime, it means knowingly presenting or filing a document that is understood to be false or forged.

Is Recording or Filing a Forged Instrument always a felony in Minnesota?

Yes, as per Minnesota Statute § 609.64, a conviction for this crime can result in imprisonment for not more than three years or a fine of not more than $5,000, or both. This sentencing range classifies the offense as a felony.

What kind of “instruments” are we talking about for this charge in Hennepin County?

The “instrument” must relate to or affect real or personal property. Common examples include deeds, mortgages, liens (like mechanic’s liens or tax liens), titles to vehicles or other property, bills of sale, or any official document that purports to establish, transfer, or encumber property rights.

Does the actual value of the property involved affect the charge or penalties in St. Paul?

The statute itself (§ 609.64) does not differentiate penalties based on the value of the property. However, the perceived severity of the offense, the amount of potential or actual harm caused, and the value of the property could influence a prosecutor’s charging decisions or a judge’s sentencing considerations within the statutory limits.

What if I didn’t know the document was forged when I filed it in Ramsey County?

Lack of knowledge about the instrument’s falsity or forged nature is a crucial defense. If you genuinely believed the document was legitimate and did not act with the intent to file a known false or forged instrument, you would be missing the required “intentional” element of the crime.

Can I be charged if no one actually suffered a financial loss from the filing?

Yes, a direct financial loss to a victim is not a required element for a charge under § 609.64. The crime is focused on the act of intentionally corrupting public records with a false or forged instrument related to property. The potential for harm or confusion of property rights is often sufficient.

How is this different from general forgery charges in Minnesota?

General forgery (e.g., under § 609.625 or § 609.63) often deals with the creation or alteration of a false writing with intent to defraud. Section 609.64 specifically addresses the distinct act of presenting, filing, or recording such a forged instrument (that relates to property) in a public office. One could potentially be charged with both, depending on the facts.

What role does a Minneapolis criminal defense attorney play in these cases?

A knowledgeable attorney will meticulously review the evidence, assess the strengths and weaknesses of the prosecution’s case, identify all viable defenses (such as lack of intent, the document not being false/forged, or not relating to property), negotiate with prosecutors, and vigorously represent your interests in court proceedings in Hennepin, Ramsey, or other Minnesota counties.

What if the document contained errors but wasn’t intentionally “false or forged”?

There’s a legal distinction between a document containing inadvertent errors or inaccuracies and one that is “false or forged” with an intent to deceive. If errors were unintentional and the filer did not know of them or did not intend them to be misrepresentations affecting property rights, this could form part of a defense.

If I filed a document on behalf of someone else, am I still liable in Washington County?

Liability would depend on your knowledge and intent. If you knowingly filed a false or forged instrument at someone else’s direction, you could still be charged. However, if you were an unwitting agent, unaware of the document’s fraudulent nature, you would likely lack the necessary criminal intent.

What is the first thing I should do if accused of this crime in Dakota County?

If you are accused or become aware you are under investigation for recording or filing a forged instrument, you should immediately consult with an experienced criminal defense attorney. Refrain from discussing the matter with law enforcement or anyone else until you have legal representation.

Can a conviction for filing a forged instrument impact my professional license in Minnesota?

Absolutely. A felony conviction for a crime involving dishonesty and deceit, such as this offense, can have severe repercussions for various professional licenses (e.g., real estate, law, finance, contracting). Licensing boards have rules that can lead to suspension, revocation, or denial of a license.

What if the public office made a mistake in accepting the document?

While a mistake by the public office in accepting a document doesn’t absolve the filer of criminal liability if they acted with the requisite intent and knowledge, it could be a factor in the overall case. The core issue remains the filer’s intent and the nature of the document they presented.

Is there a time limit (statute of limitations) for prosecuting this crime in Minnesota?

Yes, Minnesota law specifies statutes of limitations for most crimes, dictating the time frame within which charges must be brought. For most felonies, including § 609.64, the typical statute of limitations is three years from the commission of the offense, though certain circumstances can extend this.

What if the “property” mentioned in the document doesn’t actually exist?

Filing an instrument that purports to relate to fictitious property could still potentially fall under the statute if the instrument itself is false or forged and is filed with the intent to deceive public records. The key is the nature of the instrument and the act of filing it, rather than the actual existence or value of the purported property.

Lasting Consequences of a Forged Instrument Filing Charge in Minnesota

A charge for recording or filing a forged instrument in Minnesota carries consequences that extend far beyond the courtroom. Because this offense is a felony, a conviction can lead to a cascade of long-term negative impacts on an individual’s life, affecting their reputation, career, civil liberties, and overall stability. For residents of Minneapolis, St. Paul, and the broader Twin Cities area, understanding these potential collateral consequences is vital when facing such serious allegations. These effects can linger for years, profoundly altering one’s future trajectory.

Impact on Criminal Record and Future Background Checks

A felony conviction under Minnesota Statute § 609.64 results in a permanent criminal record. This record is readily accessible through routine background checks conducted by potential employers, landlords, volunteer organizations, and educational institutions. In an increasingly security-conscious society, the presence of a felony, especially one involving deceit and the falsification of public records, can be a significant barrier. Individuals in the competitive Twin Cities job market may find many doors closed to them, as employers are often hesitant to hire someone with a conviction for a crime of dishonesty. This can lead to underemployment or difficulty finding any meaningful work, regardless of skills or qualifications.

Professional Licensing and Career Ramifications in the Twin Cities

For many professionals in the Minneapolis-St. Paul region, a conviction for filing a forged instrument can be career-ending. Occupations that require state licensing—such as real estate agents, mortgage brokers, attorneys, accountants, contractors, and financial advisors—have stringent character and fitness requirements. A felony conviction involving fraud or dishonesty typically triggers disciplinary action by licensing boards, which can include the suspension or permanent revocation of a professional license. Even in professions without formal licensing, the damage to one’s reputation can make it exceedingly difficult to gain the trust of clients, employers, or business partners, severely limiting career advancement and opportunities.

Loss of Civil Rights, Including Firearm Ownership in Minnesota

In Minnesota, a felony conviction brings about the loss of certain fundamental civil rights. Convicted felons lose the right to vote until they have completed their entire sentence, including any period of probation or supervised release. They are also barred from serving on a jury. Furthermore, under both federal and Minnesota law, individuals convicted of a felony are prohibited from possessing, shipping, transporting, or receiving firearms or ammunition. Restoring these rights, particularly firearm rights, is a separate and often challenging legal process that can take many years, with no guarantee of success. This loss of civic participation and personal liberties is a significant long-term consequence.

Difficulties in Securing Housing, Credit, and Educational Opportunities

Beyond employment, a felony record for filing a forged instrument can create substantial obstacles in other areas of life. Landlords in the Twin Cities area commonly run background checks and may deny rental applications based on such a conviction, making it difficult to find safe and affordable housing. Access to credit can also be impacted, as lenders may view a conviction for a crime of dishonesty as an indicator of higher risk, leading to denials for loans, mortgages, or credit cards, or less favorable terms. Additionally, some educational institutions may deny admission to individuals with felony records, or federal student financial aid might be restricted, limiting opportunities for personal and professional development.

The Vital Role of Legal Counsel in Forged Instrument Cases in Minneapolis & St. Paul

When an individual is confronted with the serious accusation of recording or filing a forged instrument in Minnesota, securing skilled and dedicated legal representation is paramount. This felony charge, detailed under Minnesota Statute § 609.64, carries the potential for severe penalties, including imprisonment and substantial fines, not to mention the enduring stigma of a criminal record. For those navigating the complexities of the legal system in Minneapolis, St. Paul, Hennepin County, Ramsey County, or the surrounding Minnesota communities, the guidance and advocacy of a knowledgeable criminal defense attorney are indispensable for protecting their rights and striving for the best possible resolution.

Deciphering Complex Property, Forgery, and Criminal Statutes in Minnesota

The laws surrounding the filing of forged instruments intersect with property law, the specific elements of forgery, and criminal procedure. Understanding the nuances of Minnesota Statute § 609.64, including what constitutes an “intentional” act, a “false or forged instrument,” and an instrument “relating to or affecting real or personal property,” requires significant legal acumen. An experienced attorney can meticulously analyze the charges in the context of these complex statutes and relevant case law. This deep legal understanding is crucial for identifying weaknesses in the prosecution’s case and for building a defense strategy that effectively addresses each intricate element of the alleged offense within the Twin Cities legal environment.

Crafting a Tailored Defense Against Intent and Forgery Allegations in Hennepin and Ramsey Courts

Effective defense against a charge of filing a forged instrument requires more than a general understanding of criminal law; it demands a strategy specifically tailored to the facts of the case and the elements of the statute. A dedicated attorney will investigate the circumstances leading to the charge, scrutinize the nature of the instrument in question, and critically assess the evidence of intent. Whether the defense centers on a lack of knowledge that the instrument was forged, a genuine belief in its authenticity, or a challenge to whether the instrument legally constitutes a “forgery” or “false instrument” affecting property, the approach must be customized. For cases proceeding in Hennepin County, Ramsey County, or other local courts, this bespoke defense planning is vital for effectively countering the prosecution’s arguments.

Challenging Documentary Evidence and State Allegations in Twin Cities Courtrooms

Cases involving the filing of forged instruments often hinge on documentary evidence and the interpretation of actions related to those documents. A proficient criminal defense attorney will possess the skills to meticulously examine all documentary evidence presented by the prosecution, challenge its authenticity or relevance, and identify any procedural errors in how it was obtained or handled. This includes the ability to effectively cross-examine state witnesses, including document examiners or public officials, to expose inconsistencies or weaknesses in their testimony. Protecting a client’s constitutional rights, such as the right against unlawful searches and seizures or the right to a fair trial, is paramount, particularly when facing serious felony charges in Minneapolis or St. Paul.

Safeguarding Your Reputation, Freedom, and Future in Minnesota

The ultimate aim of retaining experienced legal counsel is to safeguard an individual’s reputation, preserve their freedom, and protect their future from the devastating impact of a felony conviction. An attorney acts as a crucial advocate, not only in the courtroom but also in negotiations with the prosecution. This may involve seeking a dismissal of charges, a reduction to a less serious offense, or an alternative sentencing arrangement that minimizes long-term consequences. By providing robust representation and strategic advice, legal counsel works to ensure that the client’s side of the story is heard and that their rights are vigorously defended throughout every stage of the legal process in the Twin Cities and across Minnesota.