The client was accused of violently assaulting his daughter six years before the complaint was filed. After exhaustive investigation, we won a key pretrial hearing to show the accuser had made multiple false accusations of abuse over a period of years. Additionally, we presented expert testimony that the accuser's memory was irrevocably tainted by a combination of improper parental, law enforcement, and social worker interviews. Finally, we presented a compelling theory that these allegations stemmed from a bitter custody dispute. The State dismissed all five counts right before trial.
Felony Battery to Health Care Worker-Amended to ordinance violation-Dane County
This case involved a client who was ticketed for underage drinking. When the police made contact with her, she was too impaired for them to let her leave, so they took her to the hospital. At the hospital, she was accused of striking a nurse when medical workers were attempting to assist her. The battery to a health care worker is a felony. The client was charged with that felony offense.
After reviewing the medical records, which indicated that the client was involuntarily injected with drugs to try and calm down, we had our defense. Involuntary intoxication. We pointed that information out to the prosecutor, who didn't want to try a case with that defense. The charge was amended to a simple ticket.
OWI 1st-Head on collision-Richland County-Case-Amended to Reckless Driving
There was both good and bad in this case. Our client was involved in a head on collision with a semi. The semi driver happened to have a camera in the dash which captured the client crossing the center line running into the semi. The client's test result was a .078, right below the legal limit. The prosecutor was planning on trying the case because of the video showing the client crashing the vehicle.
This prosecutor and Attorney Chirafisi had done 2 trials previously. The prosecutor made comments that she did not want to lose for a 3rd time. She agreed to amend the charge to reckless driving.
OWI 3rd/PAC 3rd- Dane County-Case dismissed on motion
This client came to us after first hiring a different firm to handle the matter. The client was not happy with the work of that firm and asked Corey Chirafisi for help. In the first meeting Attorney Chirafisi spotted an issue missed by the previous lawyer and filed a motion challenging the admission of the test result. At the motion hearing the state conceded Attorney Chirafisi was correct and agreed to dismiss all charges.
OWI 3rd/PAC 3rd .13-Columbia County-Case Dismissed
This matter involved a client who was pulled over for crossing a center line. He consented to a blood test which showed an alcohol concentration of .13. The client hired Attorney Chirafisi because he wanted to go to trial.
We had a defense to the case, the line the police say he crossed over was marked in a way that made it look as if there were 2 center lines. The biggest issue was the .13. The machine that was used was a machine that we had successfully dealt with in other cases. In late 2022, Attorney Chirafisi beat a 9th offense at trial with that same machine. We had all the documentation on its service record and were prepared to challenge it again. Turns out, we didn't have to.
Just prior to the jury being brought in, the prosecution informed the Court that they did not have the person who actually drew the client's blood present to testify. Attorney Chirafisi pointed out the statute requiring that person have certain qualifications in order to draw the blood. The Court agreed with Attorney Chirafisi that without the person drawing the blood present, the test result would not be admitted at the trial. Based on that information, the prosecution moved to dismiss the case with prejudice. Complete and total victory for the client.
OWI 5th/PAC 5th, Failure to Install IID- Case dismissed during Jury selection
We have always believed that in a business like ours, results are what matter. Lawyers can say whatever they want, the outcomes are normally what the clients care most about. This case was Corey Chirafisi's 13th acquittal or dismissal in his last 15 jury trials. We believe those results are uncommon and are what separates us from other law firms.
This case involved a slide off in a snow storm. The temperature was bitter cold and when the police arrived on scene, the client was no longer in the vehicle, a very good fact. When police were able to make contact with him, the client had the odor of intoxicants on his person and the police were aware that he was subject to a .02 limit based on it being his 5th offense, as well as him being subject to an IID restriction in order to operate a motor vehicle.
Attorney Chirafisi was able to get all statements made by the client suppressed in a pretrial motion. That was incredibly helpful as the client also had an obstructing charge based on statements to law enforcement that he wasn't driving (the keys were found in his pocket). Because there was a question regarding when the client had operated the vehicle, the state had a problem with getting the test result admitted at the trial.
During the questioning of the jury by the parties, the court was forced to declare a mistrial based on something that was said. Normally, that would simply require a new trial date with a new jury. However, the state informed the court that they were moving to dismiss the charges.
If the client would have been convicted, he would have been required to go to prison. He not only avoided a prison sentence in this case, he beat his revocation which would have almost assured a prison sentence as well. The client walked away with no conviction and now has the opportunity to continue getting his life back in order.
4 Counts 1st Degree Sexual Assault- Not Guilty All Counts- Kenosha County
This is the 12th Not Guilty in last 14 trials for Corey Chirafisi
Like many of our clients, this client initially had hired a different attorney. Eventually, when it became clear the matter was going to proceed to trial, he hired Corey Chirafisi.
The matter involved an accusation with his 11 year old daughter. Our client was looking at lifetime sex offender registration and over 250 years of imprisonment.
The matter proceeded to trial with the daughter maintaining her allegations. After 3 days of trial, the jury returned 4 not guilty verdicts in 55 minutes. This was an extremely difficult situation, as many sexual assaults are. While the client won, which is certainly the goal, the hope is the family can somehow find a way back and the client and his daughter can begin to heal.
We are extremely happy for the outcome for the client.
OWI/PAC .16- Amended to Reckless Driving
This case involved an Illinois client who, based on his residency, had issues with his license that would not be the case if he was an WI driver. So, he did the right thing and called counsel to see if they could help. We did.
The officer pulled the client over for traveling with a front headlamp out. As usual, that contact led to the officer suspecting alcohol impairment. The officer indicated the client had slurred speech and admitted to consuming alcohol.
The client was put through field sobriety tests and was ultimately arrested for Operating While Intoxicated. His breath test was .16.
The hook that led to the amendment in this case was the clear violation of the required 20 minute observation period in this case. The officer had testified at the Administrative Review hearing regarding the specific times he had completed each one of his tasks. With that information, Corey Chirafisi was able to determine that it was impossible for him to complete the 20 minute observation period as required. The prosecution offered the client an amendment to Reckless Driving. This literally saved the client at least a year without being able to drive. Again, in previous posts we have mentioned the value of administrative review hearings. We mention that value again. They can absolutely change the direction of a client's case for the better.
OWI/PAC Causing Injury .178 test result suppressed- Vernon County
This situation unfortunately involves a head on collision with injuries. That is a situation that no one wants to be involved in and luckily, the injuries were not more serious.
The client was looking at his phone to speak to his wife when he crossed over the centerline and was involved in a head on collision. Ultimately, the client was arrested for Operating While Intoxicated Causing Great Bodily Harm, which is a felony offense. He submitted to a chemical test of his blood which returned a value of .178.
After reviewing the file, Corey Chirafisi found what turned out to be a problem for the state. The officer told the client that he was under arrest for the felony level OWI. At the motion hearing, the officer conceded that he did not have probable cause for the felony offense and only had probable cause for a misdemeanor. That incorrect information impacted the client's decision whether or not to take the blood test and, in turn, led to the court suppressing the test results. The case is still pending, however, the client is in a much better position with the test result being tossed.
OWI/PAC 1st- Dane County-Case Dismissed After Cop Testifies
This was Corey Chirafisi's 12th Not Guilty or Dismissal in his last 14 Trials.
Our client was charged with OWI after being stopped for speeding at 1:50 a.m. The officer indicated he smelled the odor of intoxicants on our client and that she had red, glossy, and bloodshot eyes. The officer then put her through field sobriety tests and indicated she failed each one of the three standardized tests. She submitted to a breath sample at the police department and the result was .08. Because she was at the legal limit, she received an additional citation for Operating With a Prohibited Alcohol concentration.
After speaking with the client, a decision was made to waive the jury trial and try the matter to the court.
The prosecution called the officer to testify and Corey Chirafisi was able to cross examine him regarding his procedures. It went poorly for the prosecution. The court took a break and upon return, the prosecution moved to dismiss both the OWI and PAC charges indicating that they no longer believed they would be able to meet their burden of proof.
We have said in posts like this one, we believe that our results in cases are uncommon. In his last 14 trials, Corey Chirafisi's clients have either been acquitted or had their cases dismissed 12 times. Find someone with a better record than that. The client was happy not only for the outcome, but that she decided to actually fight the case. That is when good things happen.
OWI 9th with Minor Passenger-Not Guilty All Charges-Dane County. This was Attorney Chirafisi's 11th Not Guilty Verdict in his last 13 trials.
Some law firms tell you that they are "the best" or "experts" in the field of criminal law. We never tell people that we are the best; we prove it. This case will show why we are different.
The charges involved OWI 9th/PAC 9th with Minor Passengers. What that meant was, if the client was convicted, he faced a minimum mandatory sentence of 6 years in prison. Because it was charged as his 9th offense, his alcohol concentration limit was reduced from .08 down to a .02.
There was a 911 call from the client's ex informing the police that the client was traveling on the interstate with 2 of their children (and a 3rd child) and he was intoxicated. The police waited on the interstate for the client and when he passed, law enforcement began following him. They pulled him over for the 911 call as well as having expired registration. After they pulled him over, the usual began. They questioned him about drinking and ultimately administered standardized field sobriety tests. Because the client's legal limit was .02, the officer believed he had probable cause to arrest the client.
He was taken to the police station, he refused, and a warrant was obtained. The client's blood result came back at .15 or 7 times the legal limit.
The way this case was attacked started with the fact that the client's driving was good. He was pulled over for expired registration. Also, he did not exhibit the usual outward signs of intoxication. He didn't have slurred speech, difficulty with balance, or smell like alcohol. He did have blood shot eyes and he admitted to drinking.
The real issue was going to be the test result. Attorney Chirafisi remembered a trial that he had earlier this year in which the analyst who tested that client's blood indicated that the machine used in that case was not providing accurate results and was no longer in service at the Lab of Hygiene. It just so happens, that was the same machine that tested the client's blood in this case. That provided Attorney Chirafisi with the ammunition he needed on cross examination. The analyst admitted that the machine used to test the client's blood was no longer in service because of inaccurate data results.
One of the best parts of the trial was the rebuttal argument by the prosecutor. The transcript is forthcoming and we will share it when it arrives. The prosecutor stood up in front of the jury and said, "Attorney Chirafisi is a fantastic lawyer and if I were in trouble, I would hire him."
The jury deliberated for 3 hours before returning not guilty verdicts on all counts. The emotions of the clients and his family were overwhelming. He faced down a minimum mandatory 6 years in prison and won.
When other law firms tell you they are the best or are experts, ask them their record in trial. This is a results oriented business; that is what matters to clients. We are happy to put our results up against anyone.
Felony Drug and Firearm Case-Kenosha County
Corey Chirafisi represented Jacob Huffhines for his 2019 charges. His sentencing hearing took place on Friday, November 18th, 2022. Click the link below to learn more about the outcome of this case:
Content Link Block
Select a page and create a visual link to it.
Learn more
Fraudulent Writings and Felony Theft- Dismissal-Dane County
This case had been dragging on pre-pandemic and was hotly contested. It stemmed from a business breakup and involved civil lawsuits as well. The state made a decision to charge my client and her husband with various crimes related to the breakup of the company.
The case was ready to proceed to trial and at the final pretrial, the state walked into court and dismissed the charges. Can't do better than that. Client was relieved. Attorney was pissed the charges were brought in the first place.
UW Disciplinary Hearing
Because of our location, we handle quite a few non-academic disciplinary hearings at UW-Madison. A lot of the time the clients are facing criminal charges and as a result, also face consequences at the university, including suspension and expulsion.
This case involved a Ph.D. student accused of sexual assault. He had a pending criminal case tied to this incident as well. These hearings are nothing like court. Sometimes, including this one, the university attempts to do the hearings without having to call the complainant as a witness, thereby denying the client the right to cross examination.
That is exactly what happened here. Except we wouldn't give up. The hearing is held to a committee, without the complainant testifying and the committee votes to expel the client. We appeal that decision to the chancellor, who affirms the decision and does not require the complainant to testify. We appeal that to the Board of Regents, arguing the clients' constitutional rights were violated when he was denied the right to cross examination. The Board of Regents agreed with us! They vacated the expulsion order and are now providing the client his due process rights. Because these hearings don't happen all the time, most people don't understand the significance of this finding. It can change the face of how these hearings are handled. We are very excited at the outcome.
OWI/PAC .13- Amended to Reckless Driving-Dane County
This client was involved in a single car accident after hitting a guardrail. She was ultimately arrested and submitted to a breath test which was .13. It didn't seem like a very defendable case until we watched the video. Through the video, it became clear that the officer provided the client clearly incorrect information before requesting she submit to a chemical test of her breath. So, Attorney Chirafisi filed a motion challenging the breath test. After reviewing the motion and the video, the prosecution agreed that the information was incorrect and offered to amend the charge to Reckless Driving. Client happily accepted the amended charge.
OWI 4th/PAC- Columbia County - Motion to Suppress Granted, Case Dismissed
This case involved a client who rushed to a scene after her boyfriend was involved in a motor vehicle accident. Once on the scene, the officer who spoke to her noticed an odor of intoxicants and asked her if she had been drinking; she indicated that she had. The officer then detained her and requested she perform field sobriety tests. Because she had 3 prior convictions, her legal limit was a .02.
Corey Chirafisi challenged the detention. It all started with the administrative review hearing. At that hearing, the officer indicated that he did not become aware of the .02 standard until after he requested the client perform field tests. The officer agreed that he lacked reasonable suspicion that the client was impaired. The state ultimately conceded the motion, which almost never happens in felony OWI cases. Total dismissal.
OWI/PAC .21- Dane County- Complete Acquittal
This client was charged with an OWI which involved her striking a parked vehicle. Client was arrested and submitted to a breath test which showed a result of .21. There was no real offer in the case, so we proceeded to trial.
At the trial, the prosecution was unable to establish the time of operation, which we have repeatedly indicated in previous posts, how useful that can be. So, the Court threw the test result out, that was step #1. The prosecution tried to do the case without calling the trainee officer (who did most of the investigation) and instead relying on the training officer. When the training officer testified, he could not testify about his observations as he stated he wasn't really watching. That was step #2. Without the testimony of the actual cop who did field sobriety tests, it was a lost cause for the prosecution. Client was acquitted of both charges.
Child Pornography Charge- No Jail- Dane County
Normally, we do not post about cases where a plea agreement was reached, unless the terms of the agreement warrant further discussion, this case meets that requirement.
Client was charged with 3 counts of Child Pornography. If the client was convicted on any of the charges, there is a 3-year minimum mandatory prison sentence. It doesn't matter the number of images, or the persons lack of record, the sentence must be 3 years in prison.
Client had a search warrant executed on his residence and in the course of that search, law enforcement located approximately 6 images in various electronic devices. The client made a statement to law enforcement which, frankly, didn't help.
Corey Chirafisi was able to secure an expert who reviewed the images and location where images were found. Through that work, it was determined that the client likely lacked the ability to actually retrieve the images. Further, the lack of dates associated with the images provided the defense with an out, the state had to prove the images were accessed within the statute of limitations.
After discussion with the prosecution, they agreed to amend the charge to allow an "out" for the minimum mandatory sentence. They agreed if the case was resolved, they would recommend no jail on the case.
At sentencing the court commented on the work done by defense counsel and agreed to follow the recommendation for no jail time. A very unusual result for a very happy client.
Two More OWI Wins
Case #1- OWI 4th/PAC 4th- Dane County
Client was on bail for an OWI 3rd when he was arrested for a 4th offense. The penalties on a 4th offense involve felony level charges, possible prison time and possible lifetime revocation of driving privileges.
The client was contacted by police after his wife called 911 stating that the client had appeared at her home intoxicated. The police located the client in his vehicle with 3 open bottles of alcohol at a .24 blood alcohol level. The case hinges on one fact, operation. We interviewed the wife how indicated that she did not know how the client got to the residence, she never saw him driving and didn’t see his vehicle. There was a statement that she heard him on a McDonald’s drive thru ordering food. The camera at the drive thru was viewed for hours and at no time, was there client in the drive thru. We had something.
Attorney Corey Chirafisi filed a motion to exclude the test results because the state could not establish a time of operation. At the hearing, the state did us one better, they dismissed the entire case because they could not establish that the client ever operated his vehicle that day.
No felony, no jail/prison and no lifetime revocation. A great day all around.
Case #2- OWI/PAC 2nd- Crawford County- Evidence Suppressed
The facts of this case are extremely hard to follow. Client was observed driving recklessly in Crawford County by an off-duty Grant County Deputy Sheriff. Off duty cop follows the client into Grant County and confronts him at a gas station. Off duty cop calls a Crawford County Deputy to travel into Grant County to arrest client for OWI. Yeah, that’s not going to work. Corey Chirafisi filed a motion to suppress based on the inability to arrest outside of his jurisdiction. The court indicated the issue required research and briefing. We did that, after the legal papers were filed, the Court suppressed the field tests and everything after on the illegal arrest. Client was thrilled
UW-Madison Discipline Hearing - Board of Regents Agrees to Review Non-Academic Misconduct
We have done more non-academic misconduct, include Title IX hearings in the past couple of years. They are unlike anything else that we do. The hearings are not like court hearings in that in some situations, the complaining witness does not even need to testify in order for a finding to be made against the client when they are students at a university. The punishment for non-academic misconduct can include suspension or expulsion from a university. Even if the student is never charged criminally for the conduct.
That is what we had in this case. Client is getting his Ph.D. at UW and is accused of multiple misdemeanor charges. The initial report made by the complaining witness described her assailant, which in no way matched that of our client. No matter, the university pressed forward. The request by the university was suspension for 2 years.
A hearing was held regarding whether the client would be punished by UW for his behavior and the university did not call the complaining witness to testify. There was no cross examination of her regarding the clear misidentification in the case. The hearing panel made the determination that the client was responsible for the action and expelled him from the university.
We appealed that ruling to the chancellor, who upheld the expulsion.
Undeterred, we appealed to the Board of Regents requesting they review the matter. The Board agreed with the client's claims that his constitutional right to due process may have been violated by not having the complaining witness testify. This ruling may allow the client to finish his Ph.D. In all the years we have been doing these, this was the first time the board intervened on behalf of a student.