Recent Cases

Ryan Pacyga Criminal Defense works exclusively with people just like you and time and time again, we achieve favorable results. We’ve created a list of cases our firm has handled below so you can see what we’re able to accomplish. Keep in mind that everyone’s case if different, however, and we’ll work with you and your family to create a defense that addresses your case, your needs and your circumstances.  These cases are only a handful of the results that we have obtained for clients.  Scroll down to see examples of results Ryan Pacyga has obtained for clients, sorted by category.

Assault:

State v. Bielke
County: Hennepin Co. (5/2011)
Charges: 1st Degree Assault and 3rd Degree Assault
Outcome: Jury found Mr. Bielke NOT GUILTY on all charges.  Click here to read the Minneapolis Star & Tribune article: StarTribune Not Guilty

The case against Mr. Bielke started after Mr. Bielke’s friends were calling a woman and her group of friends derogatory names in a bar.  The name calling continued out into the parking lot.  The woman’s male friend approached Mr. Bielke and his friends.  The prosecutor alleged that Mr. Bielke provoked the altercation, that Mr. Bielke aggressively shoved the man several times, and then punched the man as the man grabbed Mr. Bielke to stabilize himself.  Several of the State’s witnesses testified similarly.  The alleged victim sustained multiple severe facial fractures, has 3 titanium plates in his face, and has a severed nerve.

Mr. Pacyga cross examined each of the State’s witnesses, pointing out inconsistencies and improbabilities along the way. He then called several witnesses that supported the theory that Mr. Bielke acted in self defense, highlighting facts such as that the alleged victim actually approached Mr. Bielke, that the alleged victim refused to walk away after Mr. Bielke told him repeatedly to do so, that the alleged victim would not back away from the pushes, and that Mr. Bielke only punched him after he grabbed Mr. Bielke’s collar.

The challenges in the case were twofold: 1) to get the jury to understand that, while Mr. Bielke and his friends could have behaved differently that night, the issue in court is not whether they acted perfectly, but whether Mr. Bielke was acting in self defense; and 2) when, exactly, Mr. Bielke had a duty to retreat before he punched the alleged victim.

After the one week trial, the jury took 5 hours to deliberate.  They unanimously found him NOT GUILTY of both 1st Degree Assault and 3rd Degree Assault.  The case is a good example of how a skilled criminal defense lawyer can present a self defense claim and succeed, even when the injuries to the alleged victim are severe.
Click here to see Mr. Bielke comment on hiring Ryan Pacyga:

State v. M.F.
County: Ramsey (12/2011)
Charge: Third Degree Assault
Trial Type: Jury Trial
Outcome: Found NOT GUILTY. The State alleged that M.F. assaulted the alleged victim by head-butting his wife, breaking her nose.  M.F. maintained that he had to pin his wife down as she attacked him, and that while he was pinning her down, their heads accidentally collided, causing the broken nose.  During the trial, the alleged victim expanded upon her original story, and Ryan Pacyga impeached her with the different versions of her story that she told to multiple parties.  Ryan Pacyga also pointed out that she made a separate statement to his private investigator.  Despite the alleged victim’s attempts to explain away every version of her story, Ryan Pacyga pointed out the inconsistencies one witness at a time, and summarized all of the differences to the jury during closing arguments.  The jury quickly reached a NOT GUILTY verdict, saving M.F. from a felony conviction.  Watch M.F. and his father talk about the job Ryan Pacyga did here:

State v. Shoen
County: Dakota (9/2011)
Charges: Second Degree Assault with Dangerous Weapon; Third Degree Assault
Trial Type: Jury Trial
Outcome: Found NOT GUILTY on ALL CHARGES. The State charged Mr. Shoen with Second Degree Assault with a Dangerous Weapon, and Third Degree Assault.  The State alleged that Mr. Shoen attacked the alleged victim and knocked him out twice with a bat or a club.  The alleged victim suffered a broken nose, a concussion, and several cuts.  Ryan Pacyga defended Mr. Shoen and raised self defense.  Furthermore, Ryan Pacyga attacked the credibility of the alleged victim, pointing out that his injuries were not consistent with injuries that a bat or club would cause.  He also attacked inconsistencies in the alleged victim’s story, and disputed the prosecutor’s claim that Mr. Shoen was the aggressor.  Mr. Shoen faced approximately three years in prison if he would  have been convicted. See Mr. Shoen discuss the job Ryan Pacyga did here:

State v. T.S.
County: Anoka (12/2011)
Charges: Domestic Assault
Outcome: The State alleged that T.S. physically assaulted his brother by hitting and strangling him.   Ryan Pacyga raised self defense at court, and rejected the State’s offer to plead guilty to assault.  The charges were DISMISSED at trial: Domestic Assault DISMISSSED

State v. Braun
County: Washington (2007-08)
Charges: Domestic Assault
Trial Type: N/A
Outcome: Amended plea to Disorderly Conduct/ Received Continuance for Dismissal

State v. Kahn
County: Ramsey (2008)
Charges: 5th Degree Domestic Assault
Trial Type: Jury Trial
Outcome: Found NOT GUILTY of Domestic Assault

State v. K.P.
County: Ramsey (2011)
Charges: Domestic Assault and Disorderly Conduct
Outcome: The State alleged that K.P. physically assaulted her husband.  She admitted to officers that she hit him several times.  Ryan Pacyga raised self defense at court, and the prosecutor dismissed all charges.

State v. A.A.
County: Beltrami (2010)
Charges: 5TH Degree Domestic Assault (2 victims)
Trial Type: Jury Trial
Outcome: The State charged A.A. with 2 counts of domestic assault and alleged that there he assaulted 2 different people.  A.A. is a Gulf War veteran and is active military.  He faced losing his military career if he was convicted, since a domestic assault conviction prohibits you from owning or possessing a firearm or any ammunition.  The State continued to demand that A.A. plead guilty to at least one of the domestic assault charges.  A.A. originally had a different lawyer in the case.  That lawyer told him to plead guilty since a witness claimed he saw A.A. commit the assault.  A.A. hired Ryan Pacyga fired his lawyer and hired Ryan Pacyga.  Ryan Pacyga fought the case, and the prosecutor DISMISSED the charges on the first day of trial.  A.A. was able to keep his military career. See the video on our youtube channel.

State v. T.R.
County: Sherburne (2011)
Charges: Domestic Assault
Trial Type: N/A
Outcome: Amended plea to Disorderly Conduct, NO JAIL, $100 fine.  Domestic Assault DISMISSED.

State v. J.G.
County: Scott (2011)
Charges: 3rd Degree Assault
Hearing Type: Sentencing
Outcome: J.G. pled guilty to 3rd Degree Assault after a road rage incident in which he tore the victim’s rotator cuff, requiring surgery.  At the sentencing hearing, the prosecutor asked for 120 days of jail.  Probation recommended 90 a 90-day jail sentence. Ryan Pacyga asked the Judge to give J.G. no jail time and just give him home monitoring instead.  After hearing arguments, the Judge did not give any jail time to J.G., and gave him home monitoring instead.

State v. E.B.
County: Anoka (10/2011)
Charges: 5th Degree Assault and Disorderly Conduct
Outcome: Assault charge DISMISSED, Disorderly Conduct charged continued for DISMISSAL.  No jail, no community service, no probation, $50 fine.  E.B. will have NO CRIMINAL RECORD.

Burglary:

State v. Benedict
County: Itasca (2011)
Charges: 3rd Degree Burglary
Hearing Type: Felony Jury Trial
Outcome: The State charged three men with 3rd Degree Burglary.  Each man was represented by a different lawyer.  Ryan Pacyga represented Mr. Benedict.  The first man pled guilty and went to prison.  The second man went to trial and the jury found him guilty.  Ryan Pacyga defended Mr. Benedict at trial, and the jury found him NOT GUILTY.  Ryan Pacyga also successfully argued against the State’s request to have all three men on trial at the same time, thereby preserving his client’s right to have his own trial and avoid potentially being found guilty by association. Click here to see Mr. Benedict comment on having Ryan Pacyga as his lawyer:

State v. J.F.
County: Chisago (1/2012)
Charges: Two Felony Burglary Charges, plus domestic assault
Outcome: Ryan Pacyga used his private investigator to prove that the burglary allegations were false, and scheduled a Florence Hearing to have the burglary charges dismissed.  After Ryan Pacyga filed the motion, the prosecutor agreed to DISMISS the burglary charges and the domestic assault.  J.F. only had to plea to misdemeanor assault with NO JAIL.

Felony Charges:

State v. C.G.
County: Ramsey (9/2011)
Charges: Felony Violation of Order for Protection
Trial Type: Jury Trial
Outcome: C.G. was charged with Felony Violation of Order for Protection. Ryan Pacyga argued that C.G. did not violate the technical terms of the order, and therefore was not guilty.  Ryan Pacyga also argued that C.G. had no intent to violate the order, and that because the Petitioner contacted C.G., then C.G. was not guilty.  The jury agreed with Ryan Pacyga and returned a NOT GUILTY verdict.  See C.G.’s reaction to the trial here:

State v. P.V.
County: Washington Co. (1/2010)
Charges: Felony flee in a motor vehicle, 4th Degree DWI, and forfeiture of $50,000 Mustang Shelby Signature Series
Outcome: Downward departure to Gross Misdemeanor, Dismissal of DWI & client got the $50,000 vehicle back

Aggravated Robbery:

State v. Brant
County: Ramsey (6/2011)
Charges: First Degree Aggravated Robbery
Outcome: All Charges DISMISSED prior to trial. In this case, the State accused Mr. Brant and two other men of First Degree Aggravated Robbery for allegedly robbing several individuals at gunpoint, pistol-whipping them, and stealing their computers and phones.  All three defendants were represented by different lawyers.  The first defendant pled guilty and went to prison.  The second defendant went to trial, lost, and was also sentenced to prison.  Ryan Pacyga represented the third defendant, Mr. Brant.  He prepared for trial and disputed the State’s evidence.  This led the prosecutor to DISMISS all charges against Ryan Pacyga’s client.  See the Dismissal here: DISMISSAL- WEBSITE COPY Also see Mr. Brant comment on the case on this video:

Murder:

State v. Hartwig
County: Ramsey (2/2011)
Charges: Aiding & Abetting 2nd Degree Murder, Ineligible Person in Possession of Firearm
Trial Type: Three-Week Jury Trial
Outcome: jury unanimously found Mr. Hartwig NOT GUILTY on all charges.  Click here to read the Minneapolis Star Tribune article: StarTribune Not Guilty trial

Click here to see Mr. Hartwig talk about Ryan Pacyga’s representation:

Click here to see jurors talk about Ryan Pacyga’s trial skills:

State of Minnesota v. 17 yr. old Juvenile Defendant
County: Rice (2009)
Charges: 2nd Degree Attempted Murder, 2nd Degree Assault with Dangerous Weapon
Trial Type: Jury Trial
Outcome: After a 2-week trial, jury unanimously found defendant NOT GUILTY of all charges

State of Minnesota v. 17 yr. old Juvenile Defendant
County: Rice (2009)
Charges: 2nd Degree Attempted Murder
Trial Type: Adult Certification Hearing
Outcome: Defense successfully kept 17 yr. old from being tried as an Adult for Attempted Murder

State v. Bender
County: Hennepin (7/2008)
Charges: Attempted 2nd Degree Murder for Benefit of a Gang, Drive by Shooting
Outcome: All charges DISMISSED one week before trial.  Click here to read the Minneapolis Star & Tribune article: StarTribune Attempted Murder Dismissed

Strangulation:

State v. S. Johnson
County: Dakota (2011)
Charges: Domestic Strangulation, Domestic Assault (2 alleged victims)
Outcome: Strangulation Charge DISMISSED at trial, Domestic Assault charges DISMISSED, plea to misdemeanor assault, no jail.

State v. Kpedua
County: Ramsey (2007)
Charges: Domestic Strangulation
Trial Type: Jury Trial
Outcome: Motion for Acquittal Granted, client found NOT GUILTY at trial.

Sex Crimes:

State v. R.T.
County: Washington (2007)
Charges: Six counts of 1st Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct, one count of possession of pornography
Trial Type: Motion for Downward Durational Departure
Outcome: Facing Presumed Guideline Sentence of 12 years, Motion for Downward Departure GRANTED, Sentenced to 1 year in workhouse with work release privileges, no prison, 5 charges dismissed

State v. C.S.
County: Rice (7/2011)
Charges: Five counts of Possession of Pornographic Work Depicting a Minor
Hearing Type: Omnibus
Outcome: The State charged C.S. with 5 counts of Possession of Pornographic Work Depicting a Minor (child pornography).  Their case was built upon an informant’s claims that she lived with C.S. and saw him download and possess child pornography on several computers and compact discs.  C.S. hired Ryan Pacyga to defend him.  Ryan Pacyga attacked the credibility of the informant as well as the forensic evidence.  After multiple court hearings, the State DISMISSED all of the charges.

State v. P.T.
County: Hennepin (2010)
Charges: Several counts of Possession of Pornographic Work Depicting a Minor
Hearing Type: Motion for Downward Durational Departure
Outcome: Facing Presumed Prison Sentence , Motion for Downward Departure GRANTED, Sentenced to 24 days in workhouse with work release privileges, no prison, Stay of Imposition.

Drug/Controlled Substance Charges:

State v. Mackenroth
County: Ramsey Co. (6/2011)
Charges: 5th Degree Controlled Substance (THIRD offense)
Outcome: In Minnesota, if you have previously been convicted of a felony drug offense, your second offense carries a mandatory minimum sentence of 180 days in jail, and you will normally end up with a permanent felony conviction.  Ryan Pacyga represented Mr. Mackenroth on his third offense (not his first or second offense).  Despite a mandatory minimum 180 day sentence, Mr. Pacyga avoided that for his client, got him NO JAIL, and a Stay of Imposition so the conviction will turn into a misdemeanor instead of a felony once he successfully completes probation.

State v. Johnson
County: Ramsey Co. (3/2010)
Charges: 1st Degree Controlled Substance
Outcome: 426 grams of Cocaine suppressed due to illegal search, all charges dismissed.

Police pulled a car over and ordered the driver and his passenger, Mr. Johnson, out of the car.  The driver had been driving without a license, and there was no proof that the vehicle was insured.  Therefore, Mr. Johnson was not permitted to take the vehicle and leave.  Before he left, Mr. Johnson asked if he could have his bag in the back seat.  The police searched Mr. Johnson, and then his bag.  They located 426 grams of cocaine in the bag, and charged Mr. Johnson with 1st Degree Controlled Substance.

Ryan Pacyga brought a motion to suppress the drugs and have the case dismissed.  He argued that it was unconstitutional for the police to detain Mr. Johnson, and unconstitutional to search his bag, with or without his consent.  The prosecutor argued that the police had his consent, and even if they didn’t, that the police had enough suspicion to search his bag without his consent.  After hearing arguments from Mr. Pacyga, the judge suppressed the evidence and the case was DISMISSED. Click here to see a copy of the Order: RichardJohnsonOrder

State v. C.H.
County: McLeod (6/2011)
Charges: Two Felony Charges of Drug Possession (Opium and Marijuana) 5th Degree Controlled Substance
Outcome: The State charged C.H. with felony possession of 228 grams of Marijuana and 1.6 grams of Opium.  The felony Opium charge was DISMISSED, and Ryan Pacyga successfully argued for and obtained a Stay of Adjudication for his client, even though the State argued for a Stay of Imposition.  This means that Ryan Pacyga’s client will NOT have a criminal record if he successfully completes probation.  Had the State got what they wanted, Ryan’s client would have had a permanent criminal record.

State v. B.M.
County: Hennepin (10/2011)
Charges: 5th Degree Controlled Substance (Second Offense)
Outcome: This was B.M.’s second drug case.  In this case, officers obtained a search warrant for B.M.’s home and discovered a marijuana grow operation with 49 plants weighing 175 grams.  Ryan Pacyga declined the prosecutor’s offer and argued to the judge for a Stay of Adjudication, even though B.M. had a prior.  The prosecutor objected to a Stay of Adjudication.  The Judge granted Ryan Pacyga’s request and gave B.M. a Stay of Adjudication, which means that B.M. will have NO CRIMINAL RECORD as long as B.M. complies with probation for 3 years.

State v. A.M.
County: Hennepin (6/2011)
Charges: 5th Degree Controlled Substance (Marijuana)
Outcome: The State charged A.M. with possessing over 100 grams of Marijuana, along with several digital scales and packages.  Ryan Pacyga argued that A.M. should be released without bail.  The State objected and asked the judge to set bail.  The judge agreed with Mr. Pacyga and released A.M. without bail.  Ryan Pacyga then negotiated a settlement for a Stay of Adjudication, even though his client had a prior criminal record.  The judge agreed with a Stay of Adjudication, so A.M. will NEVER have a criminal record as long as he complies with probation for 1 year.  Also, A.M. avoided having to do any jail time, home monitoring, or STS.

State v. Zweber
County: Hennepin (2008)
Charges: 5th Degree Possession of a Controlled Substance (Methamphetamine)
Hearing Type: Motion to Suppress Evidence
Outcome: Ryan Pacyga brought a motion to suppress the drugs that the police located in Mr. Zweber’s pocket.  Ryan argued that the police violated his client’s rights by unconstitutionally detaining him and searching him.  The prosecutor argued that the police had a right to detain Mr. Zweber and search him.  The judge agreed with Ryan Pacyga, granted his motion to suppress the evidence, and threw the entire case out.

State v. Floyd
County: Hennepin (2007)
Charges: 5th Degree Controlled Substance Sale (Marijuana)
Trial Type: Plea Hearing
Outcome: Continued – probation before conviction. 3yrs probation, amend conviction to Petty Misdemeanor, & $300 fine

State v. Chutz
County: Ramsey (2005)
Charges: 2nd Degree Possession of Controlled Substance (Methamphetamine)
Trial Type: Motion to Suppress Evidence
Outcome: Motion granted, evidence suppressed, case dismissed

DUI/DWI:

State v. E.R.
County: Dakota (9/2011)
Charges: 3rd Degree DWI (.13 with a prior 4 years ago)
Outcome: The State charged E.R. with a 3rd Degree DWI because he had a prior DWI in 2006 and he tested at .13 on the new DWI.  Because of the prior DWI, E.R. faced a mandatory minimum 30-day sentence.  Ryan Pacyga resolved it by negotiating the new charge down to a 4th Degree DWI, having the State DISMISS the 3rd Degree DWI and E.R. did not have to do any jail.

State v. D.H.
County: Washington (8/2011)
Charges: 2nd Degree DWI (.33 Blood)
Outcome: This was D.H’s fifth DWI in his lifetime, and fourth within 10 years.  He crashed his vehicle into a ditch and he had a .33 blood alcohol level.  Ryan Pacyga immediately put D.H. on a plan to try to lessen any consequences that may be coming in the event the DWI couldn’t be beat in court.  The plan worked.  Although D.H. was facing a 1-year sentence and potential felony charges, Ryan Pacyga managed to successfully argue at sentencing and prevailed.  The end result was that Ryan Pacyga obtained a sentence for his client of NO JAIL.

State v. J.P.
County: Carver (7/2011)
Charges: 4th Degree DWI (.10 Blood)
Outcome: The State charged J.P. with driving under the influence of alcohol and having a test result over .08 within 2 hours.  Ryan Pacyga challenged the admissibility of the test result, and the judge threw the test out.  All DWI charges DISMISSED.

State v. C.H.
County: McLeod (6/2011)
Charges: 4th Degree DWI (Marijuana)
Outcome: The State charged C.H. with driving under the influence of Marijuana.  All DWI charges DISMISSED.

State v. B.L.
County: Anoka (1/2012)
Charges: 3rd Degree DWI (.17 with a prior 7 years ago)
Outcome: The State charged B.L. with a 3rd Degree DWI because he had a prior DWI in 2004 and he tested at .137on the new DWI.  B.L. also had several other convictions, including a felony.  Despite this, Ryan Pacyga argued for home monitoring rather than jail and the judge agreed.

State v. A.M.
County: Washington (8/2011)
Charges: 2nd Degree DWI
Outcome: A.M. drove drunk with her 4 year-old son in the vehicle and crashed.  Her blood alcohol level was .43 and she had a prior DWI from 2003.  The State asked for a 60-day jail sentence.  Ryan Pacyga argued against anything over the mandatory minimum 48 hours.  The Judge granted Ryan Pacyga’s request, and sentenced A.M. to 48 hours of jail and the remainder on home monitoring.

State v. T.A.
County: Hennepin (6/2011)
Charges: 4th Degree DWI and Implied Consent
Outcome: Even though the client’s test was a .16, Ryan Pacyga had the charge reduced to careless driving, all DWI charges DISMISSED.  Ryan Pacyga then challenged the State’s revocation of his client’s driving privileges and the DWI on his driving record.  The Judge RESCINDED the revocation, restored the driving privileges, and removed the DWI from T.A.’s driving record.

State v. P.H.
County: Hennepin (6/2011)
Charges: 3rd Degree DWI and 2nd Degree DWI
Outcome: P.H. got 2 DWI’s within a month, and hired Ryan Pacyga to represent him on both of his cases.  P.H. also had a prior DWI from 2006.  Minnesota law requires a mandatory minimum 30 day sentence for your second DWI, and a mandatory minimum 90 day sentence for your third DWI.  Despite this, Ryan Pacyga successfully obtained a resolution of NO JAIL TIME, NO COMMUNITY SERVICE, NO STS, NO FINE, AND NO HOME MONITORING on both cases, avoiding the mandatory minimum sentences.

State v. A.B.
County: Sherburne (4/2011)
Charges: 4th Degree DWI
Outcome: Ryan Pacyga brought a motion to suppress the evidence and dismiss the DWI based upon illegal expansion of the stop and illegal search.  The judge agreed and threw out the DWI charges.  Click here to see a copy of the Order. Findings of Fact Conclusions of Law and Order

State v. J.R.
County: Hennepin Co. (10/2011)
Charges: 4th Degree DWI (Marijuana and drugs)
Outcome: DWI reduced to careless driving

State v. M.P.
County: Dakota (10/2011)
Charges: 3rd Degree DWI
Outcome: Pled to reduced charge of 4th Degree DWI, avoiding a gross misdemeanor, and NO JAIL

State v. T.K.
County: Anoka (5/2011)
Charges: 3rd Degree DWI
Outcome: No jail, no STS, no community service

State v. A.G.
County: Ramsey (5/2011)
Charges: 4th Degree DWI
Outcome: DWI amended to Careless Driving, client retains right to challenge Implied Consent

P.Z. v. Commissioner of Public Safety
County: Hennepin Co. (3/2010)
Charges: 4th Degree DWI
Outcome: Judge agreed with Ryan Pacyga that police unconstitutionally pulled P.Z. over, Implied Consent victory, all driving rights restored, DWI removed from driving record.

State v. Dawson
County: Sherburne Co. (1/2010)
Charges: 4th Degree DWI
Outcome: DWI dismissed, plead to no tail lights (petty misdemeanor), no criminal record

State v. M.H.
County: Hennepin (1/2010)
Charges: 4th Deg. DWI with urine test .17 and driving while impaired
Outcome: Both charges dismissed during jury selection

State v. Harnicar
County: Hennepin Co. (1/2010)
Charges: 4th Degree DWI
Outcome: Inattentive Driving, DWI dismissed

State v. L.S.
County: Washington Co. (1/2010)
Charges: Felony DWI (4th in 10 years)
Outcome: Facing prison or minimum of 180 days, sentence of only 40 days.

State v. Hamilton
County: Hennepin Co. (12/2009)
Charges: 3rd Degree DWI (gross misdemeanor)
Trial Type: Rasmussen
Outcome: Stay of Adjudication on 3rd Degree DWI (not found guilty), guilty of Careless driving only

State v. Jacques
County: Washington Co. (10/2009)
Charges: 4th Degree DWI
Trial Type: Jury Trial
Outcome: Client had a .12 test, told officer she “drank too much,” and allegedly failed the field sobriety tests.  Ryan Pacyga represented her at trial and jury found her NOT GUILTY.

State v. Dolalie
County: Hennepin (1/2009)
Charges: 4th Degree BWI (boating while intoxicated)
Outcome: Ryan Pacyga challenged whether the officer had a legal basis to stop his client’s boat. The judge agreed with Mr. Pacyga’s arguments and DISMISSED the case.

State v. Michaels / Michaels v. Commissioner of Public Safety
County: Dakota (2009)
Charges: 4th Degree DWI
Hearing Type: Rasmussen Hearing/Implied Consent Hearing
Outcome: Criminal charge amended to petty misdemeanor traffic violation, DWI DISMISSED / Implied Consent case DISMISSED, DWI erased from record.

Jiroutek v. Commissioner of Public Safety
County: Hennepin (2008)
Charges: 4th Degree DWI
Trial Type: Implied Consent Hearing
Outcome: Implied Consent case dismissed, DWI taken off of driving record

Kampa v. Commissioner of Public Safety
County: Dakota (2008)
Charges: 2nd Degree DWI Test Refusal – Revocation of 1 yr.
Trial Type: Implied Consent Hearing
Outcome: Implied Consent case dismissed, DWI erased from driving record, driving privileges restored to normal.  Click here to see the Order: Kampa Order Rescinding the Revocation

Schindler v. Commissioner of Public Safety
County: Chaska (2008)
Charges: 2nd Degree DWI Test Refusal – Revocation of 1 yr.
Trial Type: Implied Consent Hearing
Outcome: Implied Consent case dismissed, DWI erased from driving record, all driving rights fully restored

State v. Gleason / Gleason v. Commissioner of Public
County: Anoka (2008)
Charges: 4th Degree DWI
Trial Type: Plea Agreement/Implied Consent Hearing
Outcome: Plea amended to Careless Driving – non-alcohol related / Implied Consent case dismissed, Revocation Rescinded

State v. Spencer / Spencer v. Commissioner of Public Safety
County: Hennepin (2008)
Charges: 4th Degree DWI
Trial Type: Plea Agreement/Implied Consent Hearing
Outcome: Amended Plea to Illegal Change of Course / Implied Consent case dismissed, Revocation Rescinded

State v. Luskey / Luskey v. Commissioner of Public
County: Dakota (2008)
Charges: 4th Degree DWI
Trial Type: Jury Trial/Implied Consent Hearing
Outcome: Jury found Mr. Luskey NOT GUILTY / Implied Consent case dismissed, all driving rights restored, DWI erased from record

J.T. v. Commissioner of Public Safety
County: Hennepin (2007)
Charges: Implied Consent for 3rd Degree DWI
Outcome: Implied Consent revocation rescinded

State v. Rockne
County: Hennepin (2007)
Charges: 4th Degree DWI
Trial Type: Motion to Suppress Evidence
Outcome: DWI dismissed, Implied Consent also dismissed, Revocation Rescinded.

State v. Alvardo
County: Goodhue (2007)
Charges: 2nd Degree DWI
Trial Type: Motion to Suppress and Dismiss
Outcome: Motion granted, case dismissed

Theft:

State v. T.S.
County: Hennepin (6/2011)
Charges: Theft
Outcome: DISMISSED

Misc. Misdemeanors:

State v. S.W.
County: Hennepin (8/2011)
Charges: Obstruction of Legal Process with Force; Disorderly Conduct
Outcome: Obstruction charge DISMISSED; Stay of Adjudication on Disorderly Conduct, NO CONVICTION, no jail, no community service, no fine.

State v. W.B.
County: Hennepin (11/11)
Charges: Obstruction of Legal Process and Disorderly Conduct
Outcome: Obstruction of Legal Process DISMISSED.  Disorderly Conduct DISMISSED.  Pled to attending a noisy party, no jail, no community service.

State v. Ingvalson
County: Washington (2007-08)
Charges: Violation of a School Bus Stop Arm
Trial Type: Motion to Suppress Evidence, Trial
Outcome: Motion granted, case dismissed

State v. Kupsky
County: Wright (2007)
Charges: Gross Misdemeanor failure to stop for School Bus Stop Arm
Trial Type: Jury Trial
Outcome: Motion for Acquittal Granted

State v. A.C.
County: Hennepin Co. (6/2011)
Investigation of Promotion of Prostitution
Outcome: No prostitution charges filed, investigation closed.

State v. Crist
County: Hennepin Co. (3/2009)
Charges: Unlawful Assembly & Interference with Pedestrian or vehicular traffic (misdemeanor)
(following Rage against the Machine concert)
Trial Type: Pre-Trial
Outcome: Case dismissed

State v. Olsen

County: Wright (2/2009)
Charges: Probation Violation on 4th Deg DWI – alleges alcohol consumption violating conditions of probation.
Trial Type: Contested Probation Violation Hearing
Outcome: Case dismissed

Probation Violations:

State v. J.A.
County: Dakota (7/2011)
Charge: Probation Violation for new criminal conviction while on probation
Outcome: Client admitted that he violated his DWI probation by getting a new DWI and drug charge.  The probation agent and the prosecutor proposed a 30-day jail sentence for the violation.  Ryan Pacyga did not accept the offer, continued negotiating, and reached a result where the client received NO JAIL and his probation was DISMISSED.

Forfeitures:

Floyd v. Forfeiture Money
County: Hennepin (2/2009)
Charge: Forfeiture of Drug Money: Attempted forfeiture of Defendant’s bank account due to criminal charges of felony sale and distribution of marijuana (see State v. Floyd)
Trial Type: Negotiation
Outcome: Client retains/awarded ½ of bank account funds

State v. Benedict

County: Itasca (2008)
Charges: Theft, cash seized during warrant search
Outcome: Cash seized returned

Restitution:

State v. A.S.
County: Anoka (2010)
A.S. was represented by a criminal defense lawyer who counseled her to plead guilty to a theft by swindle charge.  At sentencing, the judge awarded the victim restitution in the amount of $134,000.  A.S. fired her lawyer and hired Ryan Pacyga.  Ryan Pacyga challenged the restitution award, and instead of having to pay $134,000 in restitution, his client only had to pay $5,000.
Outcome: Restitution reduced from $134,000 to $5,000.

State v. S.P.
County: Dakota (7/2011)
The State sought restitution for an alleged victim of a strangulation and assault case.  Ryan Pacyga represented S.P., and negotiated dismissal of the charges relating to the alleged victim.  Still, the State brought a motion to recover approximately $1,000 that the alleged victim claimed she was owed due to damages incurred during the alleged assault.  Ryan Pacyga opposed the State’s request for Restitution.  After a hearing, the judge ruled in Ryan Pacyga’s favor, denying the State’s motion for restitution.  The judge based hid decision on Ryan Pacyga’s argument that, because the State dismissed the charges involving the alleged victim, she was not a “victim” under the restitution statute, that Mr. Pacyga’s client was not “convicted” of the alleged crime, and that a restitution hearing is the improper venue for her to seek any restitution or damage award.