Chirafisi Law Office

View Original

Hit and Run Case Dismissed Dane County

Often times, law enforcement will simply assume the worst.  On a recent wintery night, our client was in a traffic accident.  He was driving in a rural area in the fog.  Due to weather conditions, he lost control of his truck and went into the ditch, striking a tree and the fence on the adjacent property.  The homeowner came out contacted with our client.  Our client asked if the homeowner had a tractor to pull the truck out of the ditch, but he did not.  So our client called his wife from his cell phone with the intent to return the next day remove the truck with the help of a friend.  After our client left, the homeowner called local law enforcement to report the crash.  Law enforcement responded and had his truck towed.  Our client returned to the scene the next day, he found his truck was already gone.  He immediately contacted law enforcement, and was informed the truck had been towed.  The deputy, who noted in his report that there were no signs of intoxicating beverages, bottles or cans in or around the truck when it was towed, began questioning our client about how much alcohol he consumed before the crash.  Our client denied consuming any alcohol.  The deputy provided information about how to get the truck back, but also charged our client with hit and run, failure to notify police of an accident, and failure to control a vehicle.  Our client, a middle-aged man with no criminal record and a clean driving record contacted our attorneys.  When our attorneys first spoke with the District Attorney’s Office, the prosecution immediately accused our client of having consumed alcohol before the crash.  Our attorney’s meticulously pointed out why there was ample evidence to the contrary.  Ultimately, our lawyers picked apart the charges, arguing why the prosecution could not sustain a hit and run charge.  Based on our attorney’s presentation, the prosecution dismissed the charges of hit and run and failure to notify police of an accident before trial.  The prosecution also agreed to amend the charge of failure to maintain control of a vehicle to a non-moving, equipment violation.