Mitigation v. acceptance of responsibility: A Minnesota expungement lawyer explains what you need to know about the delicate balance in making arguments about the offense

“It wasn’t that big of a deal.” I’ve heard this sort of sentiment in countless expungement and pardon hearings by somebody minimizing what occurred in the original case. I practice in both Minnesota and Wisconsin and I’ve heard people say it in both states. They think that minimizing the harm will benefit them. But I’ve seen many people representing themselves shoot themselves in foot. This blog article explore this delicate balance and what you need to know.

Minimization sounds very tempting, but why it can backfire

There is a kernel of truth in the “it wasn’t a big deal” argument. If the original offense was less serious than a typical offense, that is something that either a judge at an expungement hearing or the pardon board can take into consideration. The problem is that the second that your argument sounds like you are denying responsibility, judges and pardon boards, will often turn against you. It’s very difficult to draw that line when you are arguing for yourself because the arguments to minimize the seriousness often cut against the acceptance of responsibility argument. That is why it is so helpful to hire an attorney who can be that third party to argue minimization from a little bit of a detached distance.

Utilizing an attorney to draw the distinction between mitigation and acceptance of responsibility

A judge cannot hold it against a lawyer for arguing minimizing the seriousness of the original offense, because he is doing his job as an advocate. But a judge can and often do hold it against expungement petitioners representing themselves who minimize an offense. And to maximize your chances of success, it’s often best to argue both. When I am representing clients at pardon hearings and expungement hearings in Minnesota, I always tell them to leave the mitigation to me. It sounds different coming from a lawyer’s mouth rather than the person seeking to clear their own record. Whereas acceptance of responsibility, is something that is often best said in the words of the person seeking to clear their own record. Every case is different, so there are exceptions where strategy may dictate otherwise. But the vast majority of cases fall into this division of arguments.

Conclusion

If you’re serious about clearing your record and getting a real second chance, contact Subzero Expungements, Pardons & Appeals. This is what we do. A law firm that most does DWI defense may not be the best lawyer because I’ve found many lawyers to not the nuances of expungement law unless they are practicing in the field regularly. Contact Subzero Expungements, Pardon & Appeals to schedule a free consultation. 651-248-5142