ARRESTED
DOES NOT MEAN GUILTY

Background

In 2022, a head-on collision in Anoka County tragically resulted in a fatality, and the client of Minnesota criminal defense attorney Marie Pacyga was charged with causing the accident. The client was accused of crossing the median into oncoming traffic, with the government speculating that the crash occurred due to speeding. However, from the outset, there was no concrete evidence of drug or alcohol use or distracted driving on the scene.

Law enforcement failed to preserve the vehicles involved in the crash and did not retrieve crucial black box data or conduct an accident reconstruction to determine the actual cause of the collision. Despite the lack of this critical information, the state hastily charged Marie’s client with vehicular crimes based solely on the theory that he had caused the unexplained accident.

Challenge

Marie Pacyga faced the challenge of defending her client against charges based on incomplete and rushed police work. The lack of a thorough investigation by law enforcement created the opportunity for multiple interpretations of what caused the crash, putting her client at serious risk of conviction.

Defense Strategy

Marie took a proactive approach, beginning by hiring an investigator to find and interview a key witness whom the police had failed to interview. She also carefully selected an expert to conduct a fair and impartial accident reconstruction, which law enforcement had neglected.

During the investigation, the defense expert uncovered a significant mechanical failure in the client’s vehicle, offering a plausible and innocent explanation for why the client had crossed the median. This finding, which the prosecution had not considered, became central to Marie’s defense.

Outcome

Through meticulous preparation, strategic use of expert testimony, and thorough investigation, Marie was able to present a compelling case to the prosecution. The mechanical failure revealed by the defense expert provided an alternative explanation for the accident, ultimately leading to a dismissal of all charges against her client.

Conclusion

This case exemplifies the importance of a comprehensive defense strategy in serious criminal matters. By conducting a more thorough investigation than the state, identifying overlooked evidence, and using expert testimony to present alternative theories, Marie Pacyga successfully defended her client, helping them avoid a wrongful conviction in a high-stakes fatality crash case.