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.