Minnesota Criminal

Carjacking in Minnesota

Charged with Carjacking in MN? An Attorney Explains Statute §609.247, Degrees, and Your Defense.

You are facing an incredibly serious charge: carjacking in Minnesota under the relatively new Minnesota Statute § 609.247. This accusation alone can send shivers down anyone’s spine. Carjacking is a high-profile crime that evokes significant public fear and carries some of the most severe penalties in Minnesota’s criminal justice system. You likely never imagined you’d be in this situation, staring down a lengthy prison sentence and a future clouded by a felony conviction. Perhaps the incident was a chaotic misunderstanding, a case of mistaken identity in a fast-moving event, or an allegation blown entirely out of proportion. You might be feeling overwhelmed, terrified, and unsure where to turn as you face the legal storm in Minneapolis, St. Paul, or another Minnesota community.

The Minnesota legislature enacted this specific carjacking statute in 2023 to crack down hard on these offenses. This means prosecutors are often aggressive, and judges are inclined to impose harsh sentences. But an accusation, no matter how frightening, is not a guilty verdict. You have fundamental constitutional rights, and there are ways to challenge the state’s case against you. You do not have to face this battle alone. I have dedicated my practice to defending individuals across Minnesota – in Hennepin County, Ramsey County, and from Rochester to Duluth and St. Cloud – against the most serious criminal charges. I understand the immense pressure you’re under, and I’m here to explain the carjacking law, dissect what you’re up against, and build the strongest possible defense strategy.

What Carjacking Actually Means in Minnesota Under the New Law

“Minnesota carjacking charges” allege a very specific and violent crime: forcibly taking a motor vehicle from someone. Under Minnesota Statute § 609.247, carjacking means taking a motor vehicle from another person’s physical possession or from their immediate presence, knowing you have no right to it, and – this is key – using force or threatening the imminent use of force against anyone to make them give up the vehicle or to stop them from resisting. It’s this direct confrontation and the use or threat of violence to steal a vehicle that defines carjacking and distinguishes it from auto theft (which typically involves stealing an unoccupied vehicle without direct confrontation) or general robbery (which may involve other types of property).

The term “motor vehicle” is broadly defined under referenced Minnesota law (§609.52, subd. 1, cl. (10)) to include cars, trucks, motorcycles, and most other self-propelled vehicles designed for use on public roads. So, whether it’s an incident in a Plymouth parking ramp, a Brooklyn Park driveway, or an Eagan street, if you are “facing §609.247 accusation,” the state believes you engaged in this forcible taking of a vehicle. “What is carjacking Minnesota” law also specifies different degrees of the crime, with penalties escalating based on factors like the use of a weapon or infliction of injury.

Minnesota Law on Carjacking — Straight from Statute §609.247

The crime of carjacking is specifically addressed by Minnesota Statute § 609.247, CARJACKING. This statute, effective in 2023, was created to directly target and penalize this offense with varying degrees of severity. It provides the definitions and penalties that will govern your case.

Here are the key provisions of the statute:

609.247 CARJACKING.

Subdivision 1.Definitions. (a) As used in this section, the following terms have the meanings given.

(b) “Carjacking” means taking a motor vehicle from the person or in the presence of another while having knowledge of not being entitled to the motor vehicle and using or threatening the imminent use of force against any person to overcome the person’s resistance or powers of resistance to, or to compel acquiescence in, the taking of the motor vehicle.

(c) “Motor vehicle” has the meaning given in section 609.52, subdivision 1, clause (10).

Subd. 2.First degree. Whoever, while committing a carjacking, is armed with a dangerous weapon or any article used or fashioned in a manner to lead the victim to reasonably believe it to be a dangerous weapon, or inflicts bodily harm upon another, is guilty of carjacking in the first degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 20 years or to payment of a fine of not more than $35,000, or both.

Subd. 3.Second degree. Whoever, while committing a carjacking, implies, by word or act, possession of a dangerous weapon, is guilty of carjacking in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 15 years or to payment of a fine of not more than $30,000, or both.

Subd. 4.Third degree. Whoever commits carjacking under any other circumstances is guilty of carjacking in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than ten years or to payment of a fine of not more than $20,000, or both.

Understanding these definitions and degrees is crucial for building your defense.

Breaking Down the Legal Elements of Carjacking in Minnesota

To secure a conviction for carjacking under §609.247, the prosecution bears the heavy burden of proving every single element of the charged offense beyond a reasonable doubt. If even one element is not proven, you cannot be convicted of that specific charge. My approach involves a meticulous examination of the state’s evidence as it pertains to each of these elements.

First, let’s look at the core elements of carjacking as defined in Subdivision 1(b), which must be proven for any degree of carjacking:

  • Taking a Motor Vehicle: The state must prove that what was taken qualifies as a “motor vehicle” under Minnesota law (generally, a vehicle designed for use on public roads). It also must be proven that a “taking” occurred, meaning you asserted control over the vehicle.
  • From the Person or in the Presence of Another: The motor vehicle must have been taken directly from the victim’s physical control (e.g., they were driving or about to enter) or from their immediate vicinity where they could have prevented the taking if not for the force or threat. This emphasizes the confrontational nature of the crime.
  • Knowledge of Not Being Entitled to the Motor Vehicle: The prosecution must establish that you knew you had no legal right or permission to take that specific motor vehicle at that time. This goes to your mental state and awareness of wrongdoing.
  • Using or Threatening the Imminent Use of Force Against Any Person: This is a critical element. There must be evidence that you actually used physical force, or made a credible threat to use physical force immediately, against someone. This force or threat can be against the vehicle owner, a passenger, or even a bystander trying to intervene.
  • Purpose of the Force or Threat: The force or threat must have been employed with the specific intent to overcome the person’s resistance to the taking of the vehicle, or to compel them to give in to the taking of the vehicle. The violence or threat thereof must be directly linked to accomplishing the seizure of the motor vehicle.

Beyond these core elements, to convict you of a higher degree of carjacking, the prosecution must prove additional aggravating elements:

  • For First-Degree Carjacking (Subd. 2):
    • Armed with a Dangerous Weapon or Article Fashioned/Believed to be One: This means you actually possessed a dangerous weapon (like a firearm or a knife) during the carjacking, OR you used or fashioned any object in such a way that it caused the victim to reasonably believe it was a dangerous weapon, even if it wasn’t.
    • OR Inflicts Bodily Harm: This means you caused some form of physical injury to another person during the commission of the carjacking. “Bodily harm” can range from minor injuries to more serious ones.
  • For Second-Degree Carjacking (Subd. 3):
    • Implies, by Word or Act, Possession of a Dangerous Weapon: This means that through your words (e.g., “I have a gun”) or your actions (e.g., keeping a hand in a pocket as if holding a weapon), you led the victim to believe you possessed a dangerous weapon, even if you didn’t actually have one or show one.

If the state cannot prove these aggravating factors, but can prove the core elements, the charge would be Third-Degree Carjacking.

Penalties for a Carjacking Conviction in Minnesota Are Extremely Severe

A carjacking conviction in Minnesota under §609.247 will result in some of the harshest penalties the state can impose. This statute was designed to send a strong message, and judges are likely to sentence accordingly. All degrees of carjacking are serious felonies, and the potential for lengthy imprisonment is very real. Understanding the “penalties for carjacking Minnesota” and “Minnesota sentencing §609.247” implications is absolutely critical.

Carjacking in the First Degree (Subdivision 2)

This is the most serious form of carjacking, involving a dangerous weapon or infliction of bodily harm.

  • Maximum Imprisonment: Up to 20 years.
  • Maximum Fine: Up to $35,000.
  • Or both imprisonment and a fine. A conviction for First-Degree Carjacking almost certainly means a substantial prison sentence under Minnesota’s sentencing guidelines, especially if a firearm was involved or serious injury occurred.

Carjacking in the Second Degree (Subdivision 3)

This offense involves implying the possession of a dangerous weapon.

  • Maximum Imprisonment: Up to 15 years.
  • Maximum Fine: Up to $30,000.
  • Or both imprisonment and a fine. Even without an actual weapon being seen, the implied threat elevates the seriousness and potential prison time significantly over Third-Degree Carjacking.

Carjacking in the Third Degree (Subdivision 4)

This applies when the core elements of carjacking are met, but none of the aggravating factors for first or second degree are present.

  • Maximum Imprisonment: Up to 10 years.
  • Maximum Fine: Up to $20,000.
  • Or both imprisonment and a fine. While the “lowest” degree, Third-Degree Carjacking is still a major felony with a high likelihood of a prison sentence and life-altering collateral consequences.

What Carjacking Looks Like in Real Life — Common Scenarios in Minnesota

Carjacking incidents are terrifying, fast-moving events that can happen in a variety of locations, from busy urban areas to quiet suburban streets across Minnesota. The new carjacking statute (§609.247) aims to cover these frightening encounters where a person’s vehicle is forcibly taken. The degree of the charge will depend heavily on the specific actions taken during the incident, particularly concerning weapons or injuries.

These scenarios often involve a sudden confrontation, leaving victims shocked and fearful. From the prosecution’s perspective, they will be looking for evidence of force, threats, and any indication of weapons or harm to build their case for the highest possible degree of carjacking. Your defense will require a meticulous examination of these very facts.

The Armed Encounter at a Minneapolis Gas Station (First-Degree Carjacking)

You’re accused of approaching someone pumping gas at a station in a Minneapolis neighborhood like Uptown. Allegedly, you brandished a handgun (a dangerous weapon) and ordered the driver out of their car, then drove off with it. Because you were armed with a dangerous weapon during the carjacking, this would be charged as Carjacking in the First Degree, carrying the highest potential penalties. The same charge could apply if, instead of a weapon, you physically assaulted the driver, causing bodily harm.

The Implied Threat in a St. Paul Parking Ramp (Second-Degree Carjacking)

Imagine you are accused of confronting someone as they are about to get into their car in a downtown St. Paul parking ramp. You don’t show a weapon, but you allegedly keep your hand in your jacket pocket and tell the victim, “Don’t make this difficult, give me the keys, you don’t want to see what I have in here.” If the victim reasonably believes you are implying you have a weapon, this scenario would likely lead to charges of Carjacking in the Second Degree.

The Forcible Taking in a Rochester Driveway (Third-Degree Carjacking)

In this scenario, you’re accused of approaching someone in their driveway in a Rochester suburb as they are getting out of their car. Without showing or implying a weapon, you allegedly physically pull the driver out of the vehicle, or threaten to punch them if they don’t surrender the keys and get out. You then take the car. Because force or the threat of imminent force was used, but no weapon was involved or implied and no bodily harm (beyond potentially minor contact) occurred, this would likely be charged as Carjacking in the Third Degree.

The Ride-Share Confrontation in Duluth (Varying Degrees Possible)

You are a passenger in a ride-share vehicle in Duluth. During the ride, an argument ensues, and you allegedly threaten the driver and forcibly take control of the vehicle, ordering them out. The degree of carjacking would depend on the specifics: if you used a weapon or caused injury, it’s First Degree. If you implied you had a weapon, it’s Second Degree. If you used only physical force or threats of physical force without any weapon implication or injury, it’s Third Degree.

These examples highlight how the specific facts – particularly the presence or implication of a weapon, or the infliction of injury – determine the severity of the carjacking charge under §609.247.

Legal Defenses That Might Work Against Your Carjacking Charge

A carjacking accusation under Minnesota Statute § 609.247 is one of the most serious charges anyone can face. The public and legal system view this crime with extreme concern. However, even in the face of such grave allegations, you have the right to a robust defense. The prosecution must prove every element of the specific degree of carjacking charged beyond a reasonable doubt. As your defense attorney, I will meticulously scrutinize all evidence, from witness testimony and police reports to any forensic findings, to identify weaknesses and build the strongest possible defense strategy. “Defenses to carjacking Minnesota” often involve challenging the elements of force, intent, identification, or the specific factors that elevate the degree of the charge.

Understanding “how to fight §609.247 charges” requires a comprehensive approach. Was it truly you? Was there actual force or a credible imminent threat as the law defines it? Did you have the requisite knowledge or intent? Were weapons genuinely involved or merely misperceived? These are the critical questions we will explore.

Misidentification / Alibi

Carjackings are often fast, traumatic events, and eyewitness identification can be unreliable, especially under stress or in poor visibility.

  • Faulty Eyewitness Identification: Factors such as the short duration of the event, the presence of a weapon (which can draw focus away from the perpetrator’s face), cross-racial identification, or suggestive police lineup procedures can lead to an honest but mistaken identification.
  • Alibi: You have credible proof – through witnesses, surveillance footage, digital records, or other evidence – that you were somewhere else when the carjacking occurred, making it impossible for you to have committed the crime.

No Force or Threat of Imminent Force (Distinguishing from Auto Theft)

The core of carjacking is the use or threatened imminent use of force. If this element is missing, the act might be auto theft (a serious crime, but distinct from carjacking), but not carjacking itself.

  • Vehicle Taken by Stealth: The vehicle was stolen while unattended, without any confrontation or force directed at a person (e.g., hot-wiring a parked car).
  • No Imminent Threat: Any alleged threat may not have been of imminent harm, or may not have been credible enough to overcome resistance or compel acquiescence in the manner required by the statute. A vague or future threat does not suffice.

Lack of Requisite Intent or Knowledge

The statute requires that you took the motor vehicle “having knowledge of not being entitled to the motor vehicle.”

  • No Intent to Permanently Deprive (Joyriding – though still other offenses): While carjacking doesn’t explicitly require intent to permanently deprive, the underlying “taking” often implies it. If the intent was merely unauthorized use without intent to keep (e.g., an extremely misguided “joyride” scenario that somehow involved force, though this is very difficult to argue if force was used), it might be argued as a different offense, though still serious. The primary focus for carjacking is the forcible taking.
  • Disputed Entitlement (Extremely Narrow & Risky): In very rare and specific circumstances, there might be a highly confused situation regarding entitlement to the vehicle. However, using force typically negates any legitimate claim of right. This defense is exceptionally challenging in carjacking cases due to the “knowledge of not being entitled” and force elements.

Challenging the Degree-Specific Elements (Weapon, Implication, Bodily Harm)

Even if the basic elements of carjacking are present, the specific factors elevating the charge to First or Second Degree can be contested.

  • No Dangerous Weapon: The object used was not a “dangerous weapon” under the law, or it was not used or fashioned in a way that would make a victim reasonably believe it was one.
  • No Implication of a Weapon: Your words or actions did not objectively imply possession of a dangerous weapon; the victim’s perception may have been mistaken or overly fearful without sufficient basis in your conduct.
  • No Bodily Harm (or Harm Not Caused by You): Any bodily harm sustained by the victim was not inflicted by you, was accidental, or does not meet the legal threshold of “bodily harm” required for First Degree.

Voluntary Intoxication (Very High Hurdle)

In extremely rare cases, if you were so intoxicated by alcohol or drugs that you were incapable of forming the specific intent to take the vehicle or the knowledge that you weren’t entitled to it, this might be argued. However, voluntary intoxication is very rarely a successful defense to violent crimes.

Minnesota Carjacking FAQs — What You Need to Know Now

Facing a carjacking charge under Minnesota Statute § 609.247 is terrifying, and you undoubtedly have many urgent questions. Here are answers to some of the most frequently asked questions.

Will I definitely go to prison if convicted of carjacking in Minnesota?

There is a very high probability of a significant prison sentence upon conviction for any degree of carjacking. These are serious violent felonies, and Minnesota’s sentencing guidelines generally presume prison for such offenses, especially for First and Second Degree. The exact sentence will depend on the degree of conviction, your prior criminal history, and the specific facts of your case, but you should prepare for the strong possibility of incarceration.

What’s the difference between the three degrees of carjacking?

  • First Degree (§609.247, Subd. 2): Involves being armed with a dangerous weapon (or something the victim reasonably believes is one) OR inflicting bodily harm on someone during the carjacking. Max 20 years/$35,000.
  • Second Degree (§609.247, Subd. 3): Involves implying, by word or act, that you possess a dangerous weapon. Max 15 years/$30,000.
  • Third Degree (§609.247, Subd. 4): The carjacking occurs without the aggravating factors of first or second degree (no actual/implied weapon proven, no bodily harm proven). Max 10 years/$20,000.

What is considered a “dangerous weapon” for First-Degree Carjacking?

A “dangerous weapon” is broadly defined in Minnesota law (e.g., §609.02, subd. 6) and includes firearms (loaded or unloaded), or any device designed as a weapon and capable of producing death or great bodily harm. It also includes any other device or instrumentality that, in the manner it is used or intended to be used, is calculated or likely to produce death or great bodily1 harm. Even an ordinary object, if used in such a manner, can qualify. The statute for first-degree carjacking also includes an article “used or fashioned in a manner to lead the victim to reasonably believe it to be a dangerous weapon.”

What does “implies, by word or act, possession of a dangerous weapon” mean for Second Degree?

This means your words (e.g., “I have a gun, give me the car”) or your physical actions (e.g., gesturing to a bulge in your waistband, keeping a hand in a pocket as if holding a weapon) create a reasonable belief in the victim’s mind that you are armed, even if you don’t actually show a weapon or don’t have one at all.

Do I absolutely need an attorney for a carjacking charge in Minneapolis, St. Paul, or anywhere in Minnesota?

Yes, 100%. Carjacking charges are among the most serious felonies in Minnesota. The potential penalties are severe, the legal issues are complex, and the prosecution will be aggressively pursuing a conviction. Representing yourself or hiring an attorney without significant criminal defense experience would be a catastrophic mistake. You need a skilled and tenacious Minnesota criminal defense attorney immediately.

Can I be charged with carjacking if I didn’t actually drive the vehicle away?

Yes. The “taking” element can be satisfied if you asserted control over the vehicle, even if you didn’t ultimately succeed in driving it very far or if you abandoned it shortly thereafter. The crime is focused on the forcible acquisition of control.

What if it was technically my car, but someone else was driving it and wouldn’t give it back?

This is a complex situation. While you are entitled to your own property, using force or threats to recover it can lead to other criminal charges (like assault). For a carjacking charge, a key element is “knowledge of not being entitled to the motor vehicle.” If you genuinely own the vehicle and are trying to recover it, you wouldn’t have that knowledge. However, the use of force could still be unlawful. This scenario requires careful legal analysis.

What constitutes “bodily harm” for First-Degree Carjacking?

“Bodily harm” under Minnesota law (§609.02, subd. 7) typically means physical pain or injury, illness, or any impairment of physical condition. It does not require serious or permanent injury to qualify, though the severity of harm can influence sentencing.

If the victim can’t identify me, can I still be convicted?

A lack of positive eyewitness identification is a significant weakness for the prosecution. However, they may try to prove their case using other evidence, such as fingerprints on the vehicle, DNA, surveillance footage from the area, cell phone location data, incriminating statements you may have made, or possession of the stolen vehicle.

What if I was forced or coerced into participating in the carjacking by someone else?

This could be a defense of duress. If you committed the act only because you were under an immediate threat of death or serious bodily harm to yourself or another, and you had no reasonable opportunity to escape or seek help, duress might be a defense. This is a complex, fact-specific defense.

How new is this carjacking statute (§609.247)?

Minnesota Statute § 609.247 was enacted and became effective in 2023. Its newness means that legal precedents specifically interpreting this statute are still developing, making experienced legal counsel even more important.

Can I also be charged with other crimes in addition to carjacking?

Yes, it’s very common. For example, if a firearm was used, you could face separate weapons charges. If someone was injured, you could face assault charges. If the carjacking was part of a larger criminal episode, other related charges could also be filed.

What if I was under the influence of drugs or alcohol during the alleged carjacking?

Voluntary intoxication is generally not a complete defense in Minnesota. However, in very limited circumstances, if your intoxication was so extreme that it prevented you from forming the specific intent required for the crime (e.g., the intent to take the vehicle or the knowledge you weren’t entitled to it), it might be a partial defense your attorney could explore.

How important is physical evidence like fingerprints or DNA in a carjacking case?

It can be very important. The presence of your fingerprints or DNA inside the vehicle or on items related to the crime could be strong evidence for the prosecution. Conversely, the absence of such evidence, or the presence of unknown DNA/prints, could support your defense.

If I’m convicted, will I have to pay restitution to the victim?

Yes, almost certainly. In addition to other penalties, if convicted, you will likely be ordered to pay restitution for any damage to the vehicle, the value of unrecovered property, and potentially for the victim’s medical expenses or other losses resulting from the crime.

What a Carjacking Conviction Could Mean for the Rest of Your Life

A conviction for carjacking under Minnesota Statute § 609.247 is a catastrophic event with lifelong repercussions. The label of “felon,” particularly for a violent crime like carjacking, will follow you indefinitely, profoundly impacting every area of your life. The “life after carjacking conviction Minnesota” is fraught with challenges, and the “criminal record consequences §609.247” are severe and far-reaching.

Decades Behind Bars and Crippling Debt

The most immediate and terrifying consequence is the potential for an extremely long prison sentence – up to 10, 15, or even 20 years, depending on the degree. The accompanying fines of up to $20,000, $30,000, or $35,000 can lead to insurmountable debt, further complicating your life long after any prison term is served.

A Permanent Felony Record and Its Barriers

A felony carjacking conviction creates a permanent criminal record that acts as a major barrier to rebuilding your life.

  • Employment: Finding stable, meaningful employment will become incredibly difficult. Many employers will not hire individuals with violent felony convictions.
  • Housing: Securing safe and affordable housing can be a nightmare, as landlords often conduct background checks and deny applicants with such records.
  • Education: Opportunities for higher education or vocational training may be limited or denied.

Loss of Fundamental Civil Rights

As a convicted felon in Minnesota, you will lose several fundamental civil rights:

  • Right to Vote: You cannot vote until you have completed your entire sentence, including probation and parole.
  • Right to Possess Firearms: You will be permanently banned from owning, possessing, or using firearms or ammunition under both state and federal law. Restoring this right is exceptionally difficult.
  • Right to Serve on a Jury: You will be ineligible for jury service.

Societal Stigma and Damaged Relationships

Carjacking is a crime that evokes strong public condemnation. You will likely face significant social stigma, being labeled as a violent offender. This can strain or destroy relationships with family and friends and lead to social isolation. The psychological toll of this stigma can be immense.

Designation as a Violent Offender

A carjacking conviction will classify you as a violent offender. This can have numerous negative consequences, including harsher treatment within the prison system, more restrictive parole or supervised release conditions, and it can be used to enhance sentences for any future offenses.

Severe Immigration Consequences

For non-U.S. citizens, a carjacking conviction is almost certainly considered an “aggravated felony” and a “crime involving moral turpitude” under immigration law. This will likely result in deportation, denial of re-entry to the United States, and permanent ineligibility for citizenship or any other immigration benefits.

Why You Need a Tough, Experienced Minnesota Attorney for Carjacking Allegations

When you are facing Minnesota’s new and formidable carjacking statute, §609.247, the stakes are astronomical. This is not a charge where you can afford to take chances or go with inexperienced legal counsel. The state will bring its full resources to bear, seeking a conviction and a lengthy prison sentence. You need an equally powerful and dedicated advocate in your corner. As a Minnesota criminal defense attorney, I understand the gravity of these charges and am prepared to mount an aggressive, intelligent defense on your behalf.

The Critical Advantage of a Dedicated and Knowledgeable Defender

The carjacking statute is relatively new, which means that case law and prosecutorial strategies are still evolving. You need an attorney who is not only experienced in handling serious violent felonies but is also deeply familiar with this specific statute and prepared to tackle its nuances. Unlike overburdened public defenders, as your private attorney, I will dedicate the necessary time and resources to meticulously dissect every aspect of your case—from the initial police interaction and witness statements to the complex issues of identification, intent, and the elements that define the different degrees of carjacking. This focused, personalized approach is essential when your liberty is on the line in Minneapolis, St. Paul, or any Minnesota jurisdiction.

The Power of Immediate and Strategic Intervention

In carjacking cases, where events often unfold quickly and memories can fade or become distorted, early intervention by a skilled attorney is absolutely critical. The sooner I am involved, the sooner I can protect your rights, advise you against making any statements that could be used against you, and begin our own independent investigation. This includes identifying and interviewing defense witnesses while their recollections are clear, securing surveillance footage, examining the scene, and challenging the prosecution’s narrative before it solidifies. Prompt action can uncover defenses and create leverage that might be lost with delay.

Navigating Complex Minnesota Court Systems with Experience

Successfully defending a carjacking charge demands not only legal knowledge but also practical experience within the specific Minnesota court system where your case will be adjudicated. Whether your case is in Hennepin County, Ramsey County, or in Greater Minnesota communities like Rochester, Duluth, St. Cloud, Maple Grove, or Plymouth, I bring a wealth of experience. I understand the local court procedures, the tendencies of different prosecutors and judges, and how to effectively present complex defenses in a compelling manner. This localized knowledge is invaluable in motions practice, plea negotiations, and, most importantly, if your case proceeds to trial.

Building a Defense Designed for the Best Possible Outcome

My ultimate goal is to protect your freedom and your future. For a carjacking charge, this means relentlessly pursuing every available avenue for a favorable outcome. We will explore every possibility, from motions to dismiss based on insufficient evidence or constitutional violations, to challenging the admissibility of questionable evidence. If the facts support it, I will negotiate fiercely for a reduction in charges to a less serious offense or an outcome that avoids the harshest penalties. However, I will also prepare meticulously for trial from day one, ready to confront the state’s witnesses, present your defense powerfully, and fight for an acquittal. You need a lawyer who is not afraid to go the distance, and I am that advocate.