The Bushnell Law Firm, LLC

For more updates, follow the firm on Twitter at @anthonybushnell.

May 13

The next chief justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court will be Lorie Gildea, who currently sits on the Court. Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty appointed her to fill the position Justice Eric Magnuson will leave on June 30 after only 1 year in office. Pawlenty also appointed University of Minnesota law professor David Stras to the Supreme Court to fill the seat Justice Gildea will move from.

May 10

President Obama has nominated Elena Kagan, U.S. Solicitor General and former Dean of Harvard Law School, as his candidate for the United States Supreme Court. SCOTUSblog has a good summary of her background and experience.  Kagan has never been a judge.

May 1

The Bushnell Law Firm, LLC has moved to 920 Second Avenue South, Suite 1540, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55402.  The firm is located on the 15th floor of the International Centre. 

April 9

The retirement of Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens was announced today.  Justice Stevens will retire when the Court takes its summer recess.  His retirement gives President Obama his second opportunity to add a justice to the nation's highest court.  The National Law Journal has created a blog where a network of commentators will be reflecting on Justice Stevens's legacy and what his departure may mean for the Court.

January 22

Mr. Bushnell has begun teaching as an adjunct Lawyering Program Instructor at the University of Minnesota Law School.  The Lawyering Program is designed to allow law students to learn and practice the skills that are used day to day in real legal representation.  The program is required for all first-year law students.

January 5

Why you won't see the trial calendar for Hennepin criminal cases after September: An explanation of the changes to scheduling and assignment for criminal cases in Hennepin County is included in this month's Hennepin Lawyer magazine.  See what will happen to criminal cases in 2010 here.  You may want to consult a criminal defense attorney to learn how this might affect your case.

December 17

The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled today that a joint owner of a vehicle used in a crime by another joint owner can't use the "innocent owner" defense to avoid having the vehicle seized by authorities and forfeited.  The MN forfeiture statute, Minn. Stat. § 169A.63, allows government to seize a motor vehicle used in some driving crimes, including some DWI and DUI offenses.  An owner of a vehicle who was unaware that it was being used in a crime can challenge the forfeiture and keep the vehicle.  This is called the "innocent owner" defense.  Today's ruling, Laase vs. 2007 Chevrolet Tahoe, takes that defense away from a joint owner if the crime was committed by another joint owner.

December 14

Criminal cases in Hennepin County will be scheduled differently in 2010.  The Hennepin courts are beginning a "block" calendar system where criminal cases will be assigned to a specific judge for all future hearings either at the first appearance or at the pre-trial settlement conference.  The program will be phased in starting at Ridgedale in January 2010, followed by Brookdale and Southdale in May, and finally all Minneapolis cases in September.  The new approach will eliminate the unpredictable trial calendar and the courts hope that it will promote more serious settlement discussions earlier in the process.  More information will be published in an upcoming issue of The Hennepin Lawyer.

December 8

An updated list of criminal defense attorneys who are members of the MSCJ Source Code Coalition, which is pursuing the testing of the Intoxilyzer 5000-EN breath test machine used in Minnesota DWI and Implied Consent Revocation cases, has been published on the MSCJ website.

      ___________________________

The United States Supreme Court will hear a case where a Christian Legal Society chapter was denied student group status at the Hastings College of the Law (University of California) because the Christian Legal Society has a policy that those who become voting members in the group or join leadership must sign a statement of Christian faith, which includes avoiding all sexual behavior outside of marriage.  The University claimed the group was violating its anti-discrimination policies because the statement of faith would prevent students in homosexual relationships from becoming voting members.

October 6

Minnesota Court of Appeals upholds judge's refusal to let defense expert testify in DWI case where a urine test was used to test for alcohol.  Court says expert wouldn't have shown test was unreliable.  The case is Hayes v. Comm'r of Public Safety.

August 18

The Minnesota Society for Criminal Justice is now coordinating testing of the source code of the Intoxilyzer 5000EN breath testing machine used in DWI arrests.  Attorneys who have joined a Coalition to contribute to the testing, including Mr. Bushnell, are listed here.  Mr. Bushnell will be among the attorneys who have access to the results of the testing and will be evaluating how this information will be used in his clients' cases.

July 28

The Senate Judiciary Committee has approved the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor for the U.S. Supreme Court.  A vote in the Senate will follow.

July 16

A settlement over the release of the source code to the Intoxilyzer 5000 breath testing machine used in DWI arrests in Minnesota was approved today by Federal District Court Judge Donovan Frank.  This settlement resolves the dispute between the State of Minnesota and the maker of the Intoxilyzer, CMI of Kentucky, Inc.  However, the conditions under which the source code will be made available for testing by experts hired by defense attorneys may prevent most defendants from being able to use this information in their defense.  It remains to be seen how the state courts in Minnesota will respond to these conditions and whether they will decide that this fulfills the state's obligation to assist defendants in obtaining access to the source code.

June 30

June 17

The hearing in the federal lawsuit between the State of Minnesota and CMI of Kentucky to determine whether the settlement is approved is now on Friday, June 19, at 1:30 p.m. in Saint Paul.

June 17

There will be a hearing in the federal lawsuit between the State of Minnesota and CMI of Kentucky, the maker of the Intoxilyzer 5000EN breath testing machine, on Thursday, June 18, 2009, to determine if Judge Frank will approve a settlement between the State and CMI.  It a settlement is approved, it could significantly change the outcome of motions to demand discovery of the source code in DWI cases and civil revocation hearings.

June 2

The Minnesota Court of Appeals has ruled that it is clearly erroneous for a judge in a criminal case to find that the State of Minnesota does not have possession of the source code to the Intoxilyzer 5000EN.  This ruling means that the State can no longer succeed in refusing discovery based on the argument that they don't have the source code.  The case is State of Minnesota v. Kenneth William Crane, A08-0377.

May 26

    __________________

Source Code: The Minnesota Court of Appeals has reversed another district court that denied discovery of the Intoxilyzer 5000 source code to a driver in a civil revocation hearing.  The case is Thompson v. Comm'r of Pub. Safety, A08-1240 (an unpublished opinion).  Just as it did in Bowen two weeks ago (see May 12 News), the Court held that the driver had provided sufficient evidence to show the relevance of the source code and overruled the judge's decision to deny discovery.  This case further strengthens the argument for obtaining discovery of the source code in DWI/DUI cases.

May 12

New Source Code Win: For the first time, the Minnesota Court of Appeals has ruled that a judge abused discretion in denying discovery of the Intoxilyzer 5000 source code.  In Bowen v. Comm'r of Pub. Safety, A08-1267 (an unpublished opinion), the Court ruled that in a civil revocation hearing, the petitioner (the driver) had provided sufficient evidence to the judge to show that discovery of the source code was relevant.

This marks the first time that a Minnesota appellate court has overruled a judge who denied discovery of the source code.  In Underdahl II, decided by the Minnesota Supreme Court on April 30, 2009, the Supreme Court held that a judge in a DWI case who ordered discovery of the source code had not abused his discretion in doing so.  But now the Court of Appeals has ordered a judge to allow discovery of the source code in a civil revocation case when the judge had denied it.  Although the standards for discovery in civil and criminal cases are different, this marks a significant trend in favor of discovery of the source code.  The State of Minnesota has also made the same argument in both civil and criminal cases that it does not possess the source code, and the Court of Appeals is not agreeing with the State on this issue.