Law enforcement in Columbia County stopped our client for speeding, which quickly turned into a drug investigation. The arresting officer smelled the odor of marijuana coming from the vehicle. Our client and his passenger, who authorities described as appearing nervous, admitted to smoking a few hours earlier. Police searched the vehicle and located marijuana, MDMA, and a loaded, short-barreled shotgun. Our client was arrested and charged with a felony for the weapon offense and a misdemeanor for possessing controlled substances. Through negotiations with the prosecution, Attorney Tim Verhoff was able to obtain a plea agreement in which the District Attorney dismissed the felony gun charge. Our client agreed to plead to a misdemeanor drug possession charge and pay court costs. While he admitted he made a huge mistake, the client was very happy to avoid a felony conviction, incarceration, and probation.
Going Armed While Intoxicated and Possession of THC
Client was arrested as a passenger in a vehicle which was stopped for speeding. The police did an OWI investigation of the driver and when they located evidence in plain view (THC) they searched the vehicle. The defendant was alleged to have been impaired and was carrying a firearm on her person. The police also found a small amount of THC on her person as well.
The way we were able to get the evidence suppressed dealt with the unlawful blood draw of the client. The client did not initially consent to the blood draw, that was until the officer told her that he would take her to the station and get one without her permission. The client then consented to the draw. The problem was, the officer threatened her, thereby making her consent involuntary. We filed the motion on the unlawful draw and the prosecution conceded the motion and dismissed the criminal charge without a hearing. The prosecution then amended the THC charge to an ordinance violation. Avoiding the criminal conviction made the client extremely happy.
Injunction Dismissed, Dane County
Our client, a member of the military, returned from deployment and moved in with his girlfriend. The relationship was strained, and the couple had a significant argument that night. The next day, the girlfriend sought a harassment injunction against the client and he was served with a temporary restraining order. As a military member, this was significant because people subject to an injunction can be prohibited from possessing firearms, meaning a career in the military could be in peril. Our attorney was able to reach the client's girlfriend in advance of the hearing on the permanent injunction. Attorney Verhoff was able to broker a deal in which the client signed a contract, agreeing to move out of the apartment and have no contact with his girlfriend, provided she agreed to voluntarily dismiss the injunction petition.
Weapon Case Declined, Iowa County
This matter is another example why it is better to hire an attorney before you are charged with a crime than wait until after charges are filed. The client, retired from the military and licensed to carry a concealed weapon, was out walking on a nature trail with his wife, who suffers from a variety of medical ailments. They came upon individuals who were walking unleashed dogs. The dogs rushed toward the client and his wife, not responding to the owners. Frightened for his safety and the welfare of his wife, the client yelled at the dogs to stop. But it was to no avail. He then removed his firearm from his holster in the event he would need to use it and pointed it at the ground. Fortunately, the owners were able to get the dogs under control before anything happened. Upon seeing a firearm, however, the dog owners notified law enforcement. Two deputy sheriffs contacted the client and took a statement from him, indicating they were going to refer the case to the District Attorney's Office for criminal prosecution. The client immediately contacted our office. Attorney Tim Verhoff was able to obtain a significant amount of information from the client regarding his background and the circumstances with the dogs. This was information that was not included in the police reports. Our attorney then contacted the District Attorney's Office to present the additional information to the prosecution and to present arguments as to why, if anything, the client was engaged in self-defense and the defense of others. Our lawyer argued that no criminal charges were necessary. After reviewing the information from our attorney, as well as the police reports, the prosecutor agreed and declined filing charges. He also thanked our attorney "for reaching out to our office preemptively on this matter." Needless to say, the client was relieved.
Felon In Possession of Firearm - Dismissed
In this day and age, firearm possession is a hot topic. In this case, we had a client who had a prior felony conviction, which prohibited him from possessing a gun. The police responded to his residence and located a firearm under his bed.
It would seem like a pretty open and shut case right? Wrong. The government has to prove not only that the client was aware the firearm was present, they also have to prove that he had an intent to exercise control over the gun. That was the problem, there was no way that could be established. The client lived at the residence with his girlfriend (who was the person who called the police). They could not prove the gun was registered to him or that he had ever touched it.
This case was dismissed at the second court appearance.
Federal Drug Case- 10 Year Minimum Mandatory-Client gets time served (14 days)
This case was a multi-defendant drug conspiracy in the Eastern District of Wisconsin. Client was charged with distributing more than 500 grams of meth with approximately 25 other defendants. That charge carries with it a minimum mandatory sentence of 10-life. The other problem was, when the search warrant for the residence the client was staying at (his mom's), there was a firearm located in the bedroom where he was sleeping. Drugs and guns in federal court are a problem.
The client was represented by another lawyer initially but a conflict led to the lawyer referring the client to our office.
While the drug case was strong for the government, including recorded phone calls where the defendants are discussing drug transactions, the thing we needed to do was get the government to get rid of the the gun.
If the government was willing to admit that the firearm was not involved in the case, the defendant could qualify for a "safety valve" exception. That would allow the defendant to be sentenced below the minimum mandatory required by the statute.
After literally years of providing the government with proof that the firearm didn't belong to the client, and proof that he had just recently flown into town and wouldn't have had the firearm, the government gave in and agreed the gun could not be tied to the defendant.
That opened the flood gates for the client. He had done a great job since the charge of finding stable employment, finding a residence and really turning his life around.
At the time of sentencing, the government made a recommendation for 3 1/2- 4 years in federal prison. We recommended the time that he had already served (14 days) along with supervised release. The judge followed our recommendation and did not send the client to prison. It likely saved his future. Job saved, residence saved and chance to move forward in his life.
In this case winning the case didn't mean beating the charges for the client, it meant finding the way to get him to the "safety valve" exception which made the time served sentence possible.
Negligent Handling of a Firearm (Dane County) DISMISSED
Case #3: This case involved a successful business women who was really attempting to do the right thing and was charged with a crime. Our client was at her apartment when there was a disturbance outside. One of the people at her apartment went outside and, without her knowledge, obtained a handgun because they feared the person causing the disturbance would cause them harm. After the incident calmed down, the firearm was brought into our client's residence. She became very upset that a gun was in her home and picked the gun up to remove it from her home and place it outside. The gun discharged in the residence and the police were called. Once we got involved, we pointed out the facts mentioned above, including the fact the government had incorrectly charged the case, and could not meet their burden of proof. The government agreed and dismissed the case
Gun Charge Dismissed At Initial Appearance
A Dane County court commissioner had no choice but to dismiss a criminal charge of going armed while intoxicated against our client at a recent initial appearance. The client, who was pulled over for a traffic violation, was initially charged with a criminal offense for having a firearm in her possession while she was intoxicated. Attorney Verhoff attended the first hearing and received a copy of the charging document called the criminal complaint. He immediately noticed the complaint failed to allege that the firearm was loaded at the time our client possessed it. This is an element of the criminal charge. Our attorney moved to dismiss the complaint and charge based on the prosecution's failure to sufficiently allege all elements of a crime in the charging document. Given the defect in the complaint, the court commissioner dismissed the case.
Road Rage With Gun Amended From Criminal Charge
The Dane County District Attorney's Office charged our client with criminal disorderly conduct while armed after he was alleged to have pointed a firearm at another driver during a road rage incident. Upon meeting with the prosecutor, Attorney Verhoff noted a recent change in the law that provides the equivalent of an affirmative defense to displaying a firearm, provided there is no malicious intent. According to the reporting party in this case, our client displayed a firearm during the incident, but he also let the clip drop from the magazine while brandishing the firearm. Attorney Verhoff argued to the prosecutor that this reflected an act that was more akin to self-defense and by dropping the clip the client was showing a lack of malicious intent. The prosecutor, who was not aware of the change in the law, decided to amend the charge to a non-criminal citation that is the legal equivalent to a parking ticket.
Shooting Case Dismissal in Dane County
Sometimes good people find themselves in bad situations. A college student and member of the United States military, our client received word that he had been selected for officer training. To celebrate, he went out to the bars. He returned home intoxicated and got into an argument with his live-in girlfriend. In a drunken state, he grabbed his service rifle during the argument and threatened to harm himself. Worried, his girlfriend tried to take the rifle away from him. Unfortunately, it discharged, and she received a complex gunshot wound to the hand. When police arrived, he made statement to law enforcement, essentially a confession. Police arrested the client, and prosecutors charged him with a felony for endangering safety and a misdemeanor for possessing a firearm while intoxicated. Attorney Tim Verhoff knew the case would not be easy, given the serious nature of the allegations. He knew the prosecution would be skeptical. And the facts were certainly not in our client’s favor. The client followed our advice, enrolled in alcohol treatment, saw a psychiatrist, and saw a therapist for domestic violence counseling. The client did well with his treatment providers, and our lawyers were able to use the opinions of those experts to convince the prosecution this was an isolated event and the client did not present an ongoing threat. Ultimately, our lawyers struck a deal with the prosecution by which the client would complete a deferred prosecution program and the case would be dismissed upon his successful completion. This outcome was a huge success for the client because it avoided a conviction for any charge, which would have resulted in losing his right to possess a firearm and ended his military career.
Client found NOT GUILTY in gun case
The new law in Wisconsin which allows our citizens to carry a firearm has caused the lines on what citizens can and can't do with a firearm to become blurry.
Police were dispatched to a 911 call of a man with a gun. The complaining witness informed dispatch that the vehicle they had just passed had a driver in it who threatened them with a gun.
The police stopped the client at his home and he acknowledged that there was an incident on the road and that he did display a firearm. The officer testified that the client told him that he showed the gun to the couple in the other vehicle "so they knew not to [mess] with him."
The client hired Chirafisi & Verhoff, and after some research, the attorneys believed the client's actions were not only justified, but not in violation of the law on carrying firearms. The matter went to trial on June 9th and after 4 hours of deliberation, the jury found the client not guilty and the case was dismissed.