OWI 1st- client found not guilty at trial

People who question whether or not they need a lawyer on an OWI should read this blog. 

Our client initially was going to do the case without counsel. She wanted to do that because her test result was a .079 and she thought the government would simply cave in because of the test being below the legal limit. She was wrong.  The government chose to pursue the case with the evidence they had.  They told her that they would not amend or dismiss the charges.

Finally, she reached out to Corey Chirafisi for help.  The trial was only about 2 weeks away when she hired the firm, however, we were able to review the evidence and be prepared even on the short notice.

The officer testified and at the conclusion of his testimony, the court made the finding that the government did not meet their burden of proof and found the client not guilty.

OWI 3rd/PAC Shawano County- charges amended to OWI 1st

Our client was arrested for OWI 3rd with a blood alcohol concentration of .20.  Our client was very concerned about serving a jail sentence, which was valid as their case was pending in Shawano County, a county that is usually very hard on drunk driving cases.

What we were able to do is collaterally attack the client's 2nd offense OWI from the early 1990's.  The prosecutor actually agreed that he couldn't establish the client waived his rights to counsel and stipulated to our motion. With that stipulation in place, the client's 3rd offense became a 1st offense.  No jail, minimum fine and minimum revocation.  Our client got the exact result he had hoped for. 

All Around Victory: OWI Reduced to Reckless, DC and Refusal Dismissed

Law enforcement stopped our client for what is termed a "rolling domestic."  He and his girlfriend were having an argument in the car, and she called police.  Upon arrival, law enforcement pulled him over and asked him to step out of the car.  The police began questioning the client about what happened.  Officers also smelled an odor of intoxicants, and the client admitted to consuming alcohol at dinner.  Authorities then asked him to submit to field sobriety tests, but he refused.  He also refused to submit to a chemical analysis of his breath.

The client was arrested on a criminal charge of disorderly conduct, an OWI-first and the refusal to agree to a chemical analysis of his breath.  Attorney Verhoff spoke with prosecutors at the time of charging, and they agreed not to charge a criminal offense. Instead, the District Attorney issue an ordinance violation on the disorderly conduct.  As the case unfolded, our attorney was able to convince the prosecution to amend the OWI charge to a citation for reckless driving, dismiss the refusal, and dismiss the disorderly conduct citation.  In the end, the client paid a modest fine on the reckless driving, but avoid a conviction for an OWI and the refusal, as well as a criminal charge, and the accompanying license implications and associated fines.  

Homicide OWI Charge Declined

Law enforcement referred to prosecutors potential criminal charges of homicide by intoxicated use of a motor vehicle after our client crashed his car while drinking and driving. In a tragic twist, a passerby who stopped to assist the client after the crash was killed.  Attorney Verhoff spoke with prosecutors prior to charges being issued and argued that while our client was impaired while driving and should be held accountable for those actions, he did not directly cause the death of the other person.  If charged criminally, this would leave open a statutory defense to the charge.  Prosecutors ultimately agreed.  Although the client was charged and convicted of OWI-1st Offense, the prosecution declined to file the homicide charge. 

OWI/PAC Verdict: Not Guilty, 0.147 Alcohol Concentration

A Grant County jury recently returned not guilty verdicts on charges of OWI-2nd and PAC-2nd, acquitting our client of all counts.  In November 2017, a Grant County Sheriff's Deputy stopped our client for speeding and for what he described as an unsafe passing of another vehicle.  After field sobriety tests, the client was arrested and agreed to submit to a blood test, which resulted in a reported value of 0.147.  Our office litigated the case at every turn, having an administrative review hearing and a motion hearing to suppress evidence.  This gave Attorney Verhoff several opportunities to question the deputy before trial, which proved instrumental in front of the jury.  At trial, Attorney Verhoff argued the client's driving, as seen on video, was not as poor as the deputy portrayed in his report.  He also argued the client's performance on the field sobriety tests was pretty good, particularly when compared to the high blood test results.  He even got the deputy to testify under oath that the client did "surprisingly well" on field sobriety tests, given how high his blood test was.   Attorney Verhoff suggested the disparity between the field sobriety tests and the blood test results meant something wasn't right with the case.  And that something was a problem with the collection of our client's blood.  During the cross examination of those involved in the blood collection and testing, our attorney raised these issues.  Then, with the final witness in the case, Attorney Verhoff called an expert who offered an opinion on the blood collection and testing in this case and how it likely corrupted the test results.  And the ultimate result: A not guilty verdict!  

OWI 1st. .09 accident/hit and run- Dane County

Our client was driving at bar time on a busy street in downtown Madison. He was involved in an accident for sideswiping another vehicle and then leaving the scene.  When police made contact with him, he was not very cooperative and was charged with multiple offenses, including OWI/PAC and a criminal charge of Hit and Run.

Chirafisi & Verhoff got involved in the case and started with the Hit and Run charge.  We met with the prosecutor prior to the court appearance and were able to convince the prosecutor not to charge the Hit and Run.  

Next was the OWI charge.  The accident did pose a problem (as it usually does) and being over the legal limit compounded the accident.

As the matter closed in for trial, we found an issue with the manner that the breath test was conducted.  We decided to hold this issue back and not disclose it to the other side until we had an opportunity to cross examination the breath test operator.  It turns out that we never had the opportunity to do so because the prosecutor called us and agreed to amend the charge to reckless driving.  At the end of the day, the hit and run disappeared and so did the OWI.

OWI 1st- accident .22- charge amended to reckless driving

Our client was involved in an accident on the interstate with a semi trailer. The trooper who arrived on the scene believed that, based on the odor of intoxicants, accident and bloodshot eyes, the client was intoxicated. Our client retained our firm because Chirafisi & Verhoff had previously represented her boyfriend.  (His OWI charge was also amended due to our firm’s work on his case.)

We filed two motions in this case: first, a motion challenging the basis for conducting field sobriety tests.  The second motion involved the distance in which the client was moved to conduct field sobriety tests.

On the morning of the motion hearing, the state voiced concern about whether or not they would be successful in defending the motions.  The state offered our client a reckless driving charge to resolve the case. The client was thrilled with the result!

Felony OWI Reduced to Misdemeanor

Our client was arrested and charged with a felony OWI in Dane County.  Upon review of the client's driving abstract, Attorney Verhoff recognized one of the prior convictions upon which the prosecution was relying as a basis for counting prior convictions could not be used in the pending case.  This was because the earlier conviction transpired in a municipal court that did not have proper jurisdiction over the case.  Based on our lawyer's challenge to the use of the prior conviction from municipal court, prosecutors from the Dane County District Attorney's Office were forced to reduce the pending charge from a felony to a misdemeanor.  Spared a felony conviction, the client was thrilled.

OWI/PAC .17 Amended to Reckless Driving

This case comes out of a stop in Columbia County. Our client was pulled over by the State Patrol for illegal tinting of their windows and no front license plate.  The trooper smelled the odor of intoxicants and the client admitted to having consumed a couple of drinks earlier in the evening.  

Our client was put through field sobriety tests and was arrested for an OWI.  This is the point where the case turned, the client had a prior OWI conviction which was more than 10 years ago.  That would make this OWI charge another first offense; however, the trooper misread the teletype and repeatedly informed the client that this was a 2nd offense and a blood test was required. 

Attorney Corey Chirafisi filed a motion challenging the defendant's consent to the test because the client was misinformed regarding what he was being charged with (2nd offense vs. 1st offense).  The parties had a lengthy consented hearing with multiple sets of briefs filed.  Prior to the Court deciding the issue, the government offered to amend the charge from an OWI to Reckless Driving.  It was the outcome the client was hoping for all along.  The OWI conviction would have triggered the IID requirement based on it being the client's 2nd offense (in lifetime) and the test result was above the 0.15 threshold.  Very happy client.

Felony Drug Possession- all evidence suppressed

Client was charged with OWI and felony drug possession. Client was involved in an accident which ultimately lead to police locating fentanyl in the client’s purse. The client was referred to Chirafisi & Verhoff from an outstanding lawyer in Milwaukee and we got started. The government wanted the client to plead to the felony drug charge, as fentanyl is an opioid, and they believed a conviction was appropriate. 

The video in the case actually was the big game changer here. The video showed the client was arrested and her purse was removed from her body and not searched for almost 20 minutes after she was put in the back of the squad car. That information was never mentioned in the police reports. 

We argued the search was unlawful without a warrant. After a lengthy hearing, the Court agreed, and suppressed the drugs found in the client's purse.

EVIDENCE SUPPRESSED, DANE COUNTY OWI DISMISSED

The Dane County District Attorney' Office dismissed an OWI case against our client after Attorney Tim Verhoff successfully argued the evidence was obtained in violation of the United States Constitution.  A Dane County deputy sheriff stopped our client for a license plate violation at approximately 3:00 a.m. Upon making contact with the client, the deputy observed a strong odor of intoxicants, and the client  admitted to the deputy that she had been drinking shots earlier that night.  Based on that information, the deputy requested the client to perform field sobriety tests, and he arrested her for OWI at the conclusion of the tests.  Given the lack of bad driving prior to the stop,and the lack of outward indicators of impairment, our lawyers filed a motion challenging deputy's basis to ask our client to perform field sobriety tests.  At the hearing, Attorney Verhoff thoroughly cross examined the deputy.  He then argued the deputy did not have a sufficient reason to extend the scope of the stop and conduct an OWI investigation.  The judge agreed and ruled that all of the evidence obtained after the deputy's initial contact with our client was inadmissible at trial.  Without any additional evidence, the prosecution was left with little choice but to dismiss the case against our client.

On Day of Trial, OWI/PAC Amended to Reckless Driving

The Palmyra Police Department stopped our client for speeding.  Upon contact, the officer observed the defendant to have blood-shot and glassy eyes.  The officer also smelled the odor of intoxicants.  The officer had the client perform field sobriety tests.  At the conclusion, the officer arrested the client, who agreed to submit to a blood test.  The test result revealed an alcohol concentration of 0.09. 

Our office litigated the case for several months.  Our attorneys believed our client had a good defense at trial, but the prosecution repeatedly had extended the same offer.  The client could plead to the OWI for minimum penalties.  Our attorneys informed the client that even if convicted at trial, he would not be in a significantly worse position than if he simply accepted the offer.  On the morning of the trial, the prosecutor reached out to Attorney Verhoff, who told the prosecutor he was ready to go and would see him in court.  At that time, the prosecutor stated, "No, that's not going to happen."  Attorney Verhoff asked what the prosecutor meant, and the prosecutor indicated he would be willing to resolve the entire case short of a trial with an amendment to Reckless Driving and a dismissal of the speeding ticket.  It goes without saying that our client was ecstatic with the outcome and happy that he heeded our advice not to settle for the original offer. 

Not Guilty Verdict OWI/PAC, Dane County

The Maple Bluff Police Department stopped our client for a registration plate lamp being out in the early morning hours.  The officer noticed an odor of intoxicants coming from the client and had him complete field sobriety tests.  The client was arrested and agreed to submit to the a breath test, which showed an alcohol concentration of  0.10.  As the case moved forward, the the prosecutor offered to settle the case for a dismissal of the lamp violation and a plea to the OWI for the statutory minimum penalties.  With little to lose, the client listened to our advice and rejected the offer. 

At the trial, Attorney Verhoff objected to the manner in which the prosecution attempted to introduce the test results on grounds of a lack of proper foundation.  The judge sustained the objection and the test result was never received into evidence. At the conclusion of the trial, Attorney Verhoff argued that there could be no conviction on the PAC charge due to a lack of a test result received into evidence.  While he acknowledged the client should be convicted of the lamp violation, he argued the government failed to prove the OWI.  He honed in on the lack of any bad driving and the officer's answers to his questions regarding the client's performance on field sobriety test. 

After the trial, but before the verdict was rendered, the arresting officer and the bailiff both complimented Attorney Verhoff on his performance.  The arresting officer, who does OWI training for his department, even told Attorney Verhoff he would be using the cross examination and trial experience when he trains other officers in the future.  While it was nice, if not unusual, to receive adulation from the officer who made the arrest, the verdict was even better: Not guilty on both the OWI and the PAC!

5 More Great Outcomes for Clients

OWI 1st/PAC- Waukesha County- Amended to Reckless Driving

            The first case involved a client that was called in for sleeping in his vehicle on the side of the road after a day at a golf outing.  The client pulled his vehicle off the side of the road and a passerby called the police to check on him.  Once the police showed up, the case was off and running.

            The difficulty initially was the location of the case.  Waukesha County has been notoriously hard on OWI cases.  This one started no differently.  The case started in municipal court.  While the client was not initially successful at the municipal level, the information obtained through cross examination of the officers ultimately lead to resolution of the case in circuit court.

            Attorney Corey Chirafisi was able to raise serious questions as to what time the client was driving his vehicle.  That driving time put the test result, which was .089, in real jeopardy.  Also, based on the officers testimony regarding the 20 minute observation period, it became clear that no observation period of the client was ever done.

            On the eve of trial, the prosecutor offered to resolve the case for a reckless driving ticket.  The client was more than happy to accept that amendment.  It was especially satisfying as the client was unsure whether or not he wanted to appeal the case to circuit court.  Having never been arrested before, he had real questions about how that outcome may have been different from municipal court.  We are very glad he was willing to trust us to help him get through this. 

OWI- Amended to Inattentive driving- Dane County

            The second case shows why hiring a lawyer can change a case very quickly.  The client was charged in Dane County with OWI as she was stopped for speeding.  The officer believed that she was intoxicated based on the time (almost 2 a.m.), the odor of intoxicants and the bloodshot, watery eyes the officer said he observed.  The client was thinking about just pleading guilty to the OWI for a minimum sentence seeing that her test result was right at the legal limit. 

            After speaking to Corey Chirafisi, the client made a decision to fight the case; that turned out to be a great decision.  Attorney Chirafisi had dealt with the prosecutor on multiple occasions in the past.  After a conversation about some of the weaknesses in the government’s case, the prosecutor offered a reckless driving.  That was rejected by the client.  We believed we could do better, we were right.  Finally, the prosecutor offered a 4 point reckless driving ticket and even dismissed the speeding charge.

            Making a call to our office turned out to be a wise decision for the client.

Felony OWI 4th –amended to misdemeanor

            Collaterally attacking prior convictions has become more difficult as time has passed.  While it allows prior cases in which the client did not have a lawyer to be voided for counting purposes, courts and prosecutors have become better at dealing with these potential issues.

            The client was arrested for a felony 4th OWI charge.  Obviously, avoiding a felony conviction and all that comes with that was a very big goal of the clients.  So, Attorney Corey Chirafisi reviewed the client’s prior OWI convictions and found that he did not have a lawyer on his 2nd offense.  Sounds great, but the problem was that he did have a lawyer on an earlier criminal case which made things far more interesting.

            Attorney Chirafisi and the client put all the necessary paperwork together and filed the motion challenging the prior conviction.  The government, as per usual, was not going to concede this issue.  A hearing was held.  The client testified, was cross examined and did a great job.  The court found that the government did not meet their burden and voided the prior 2nd offense conviction, turning this felony 4th into a misdemeanor. 

            The ramifications are enormous.  Gun rights, felony probation, possible prison time.  The client was extremely grateful for the work our firm did on his case.

Possible False Imprisonment Dane County-Declined Prosecution

            We have said this multiple times in this blog, getting a lawyer as early as possible can make a huge difference in how a case turns out.  We spend a fair amount of time dealing with clients who likely will be charged, but hire us before formal charges have been filed.  Some of the time, we can avoid any charges being filed.  That is hands down the best result.

            This case was incredibly challenging as it dealt with a possible felony false imprisonment with a stranger.  Stranger cases are far more difficult to maneuver as prosecutors worry about danger to the public and protection of the community when deciding how to charge these cases.  The client is a highly successful student with a very bright future.  He did what many college students do: went out, drank too much and found himself in the company of a female who he had met that evening. 

            The women ultimately called the police and reported that the client had held her down against her will.  The police spoke to the client before he had counsel and in fact arrested and booked him.  The clients family was referred Chirafisi and Verhoff and we started by informing the police that the client was no longer interested in cooperating with any investigation.  We then reached out to the DA’s office in an attempt to get “ahead” of the reports reaching their office.

            After a conversation with law enforcement, there was an agreement for up front counseling with no referral to the DA’s office at all.  Case done, client’s future secure.

1st Degree Sexual Assault of Child- Charges Declined

            This blog above mentions the benefits of getting a lawyer before a case is filed.  This is another perfect example of how that works to a client’s benefit.

            The client was referred to Chirafisi & Verhoff on a Saturday from a former client on a possible sexual assault investigation.  Making a call to our office on a Saturday was the first positive step.  The police work weekends, and so do we.  We got in touch with the client and made sure that no statements were provided to the police.  That was helpful, since later that day the detective attempted to make contact with the client to get a statement.

            Because the allegation involved a biological child, the county then got involved with social workers who also were doing an investigation and wanted to speak to the client.  We had to step in and prevent and type of statement whatsoever from being made by the client.  Don’t help the police, any statement will only do that. 

            We then spoke to some of the possible witnesses to the matter and let the DA’s office know that we had begun our investigation.  Ultimately, with no client statement to either law enforcement or social services, the DA was left to make a charging decision based on what information they had.  They made a decision to decline the prosecution of a charge that is the most serious in this state, short of 1st degree intentional homicide. Another great result for a really good guy.

OWI-2nd at 0.14 Dismissed, Sauk County

In this case, our client hired Chirafisi & Verhoff upon a recommendation from another local lawyer.  The client, an out-of-state resident and over-the-road salesman, was in Wisconsin on business.  On his way home from diner at a restaurant, police stopped him and ultimately arrested him for OWI-2nd Offense and PAC-2nd Offense with a reported alcohol concentration of 0.14.  The client was clear from the start.  Any OWI-related conviction would result in the loss of his license and the loss of his career.  Attorney Verhoff began the case by conducting the administrative review hearing.  This proved to be instrumental in the ultimate outcome, as the police officer gave answers to questions that did not align with the video evidence later received.  Armed with this information, Attorney Verhoff filed a motion to suppress evidence in the case.  On the day of the scheduled hearing, the prosecutor told Attorney Verhoff that he thought the prosecution would prevail at the suppression hearing.  However, the prosecutor was more concerned about what Attorney Verhoff would do to the officer in cross examination at trial.  Given his concerns, the prosecutor made an unusual offer in this time of case. He agreed that if the client withdrew the suppression motion and settled the case short of trial, he would dismiss the OWI and the PAC charges.  Instead of those charges, the prosecutor agreed to have the client plead to an obstructing charge.  In so doing, the client avoided any licensing implications and saved his job.  Needless to say, the client was thrilled with the outcome.  

4 More Outstanding Results Include No Prosecution on Negligent Homicide Charge

In the past 10 days or so, Chirafisi & Verhoff has had four more outstanding outcomes for our clients!

Case #1- Pre-charge Negligent Homicide

This case involved a motor vehicle accident resulting in the death of the client’s passenger.  Initially when the client’s family called us, there was an allegation that the client had failed to stop at a stop sign, resulting in the vehicle striking a semi which ultimately led to the death of the passenger.  We were informed that there were multiple witnesses who observed the accident.

At that point the client had not been charged, so it gave us an opportunity to get to work on some areas of the defense.  The first thing we did was hire an accident reconstructionist.  The expert was able to get out to the scene shortly after the accident and get measurements before the government was able to complete their reconstruction.  

We notified the State that we had been retained and that an expert was on board.  Ultimately after more than 8 months of investigation in the case, the State had the detective assigned to the case inform us that no criminal charges were being brought against the client.  While the case involved a tragedy when the passenger lost his life, we were able to help avoid the client from having to face serious felony charges stemming from the accident.

Case #2-  OWI 1st/Refusal- Complete Dismissal of all Charges

Client was on vacation at a campground when he was arrested for OWI 1st.  What made matters much more difficult was he was an Illinois licensed driver.  The penalties for Illinois drivers arrested for OWI in Wisconsin is very severe in Illinois.  Clients can lose their driving privileges in Illinois for years, even on 1st offenses.

The client was also alleged to have refused to submit to an evidentiary chemical test of his blood when requested by the police.  Believe it or not, the case involved the client driving a gas powered golf cart on a public roadway.  He was involved in an accident which severely injured him and he had no memory of what occurred.  The prosecutor wasn’t moving on the case, initially recommending the OWI charge along with the IID requirement.  

We began by watching a video from a bar parking lot where the accident occurred.  We slowed down the video literally second by second.  What we discovered was for a split second on the video, headlights from a vehicle were on the golf cart and we could see that another person was actually the driver of the golf cart.  Once the accident occurred, that person fled the scene and because our client suffered a head injury, he had no recollection as to who was driving.

We then showed the prosecutor the video from the bar and he dismissed all charges against the client.

Case #3- OWI/PAC 1st- Dane County- amended to inattentive driving

This client, like many we have, needed a valid license to continue working a brand new dream job he had just landed.  A conviction would have resulted in immediate termination from his company.  

A gas station worker witnessed our client pull into the parking lot with a flat tire and riding on his rims.  The client was alleged to have parked his car, opened the door and threw up, then tried to go to sleep in the parking lot.  The police arrived shortly after our client got there, and our client was put through field sobriety tests after the police noticed his blood shot eyes, slurred speech and his clothes having vomit on them.

The client tested a .088 on the breath test after being arrested.  Further, the client informed the police that he had not consumed alcohol for 6 plus hours as it was approximately 5:30 a.m. when the police made contact with him.

Ultimately after back and forth negotiations with the prosecutor, the government offered to resolve the case for an inattentive driving ticket.  It saved the client's career.

Case #4- Two Counts of Second Degree Sexual Assault turned into One count of Child Abuse to Deferred Prosecution with Alford Plea

This case took two years to resolve.  It started as 2 counts of sexual assault.  Client had used our services in the past and when these charges were filed he came to us again for assistance.

The turning point in the case was when we were able to convince the judge that the time alleged in the complaint (approximately 3 weeks) was too long.  The prosecution was required to go back to the mother of the complainant and she had to narrow down the time frame.  That changed the entire case.  She narrowed it down to 3 days.  When we were provided with that information, we were able to get the client's work records which showed it was likely that he was working at the time of the allegation.  

Once we provided that information to the DA, the case basically fell apart.  If the client does not get in any trouble for the next 12 months, the entire case will be dismissed.  Outcome totally changed our client's life. 

OWI Amended to Reckless Driving, Verona

The City of Verona Police Department pulled our client over for failure to dim her bright lights at about 1:40 a.m..  The officer asked her if she had been drinking, and the client admitted to being on her way how from an area bar with her husband.  After field sobriety tests, police searched the car and located an open bottle of alcohol.  The client was arrested and agreed to a breath test, which carried a 0.08 reported alcohol value.  Attorney Verhoff felt pretty good about the case, and even better after he won the administrative review hearing.  At the pretrial conference, Attorney Verhoff told the prosecutor it would be a trial unless the prosecutor was willing to come off the OWI and PAC charges.  And prior to trial, the prosecutor did just that, agreeing to amend this matter to a reckless driving ticket.    

OWI/PAC 1st- .14- Amended to Reckless Driving- Parked on Railroad Tracks

Our client awoke to realized he was parked on railroad tracks.  He didn't know what happened, so he decided to call 911.  Probably a bad idea.

When the police arrived, they begun to question the client regarding the odor of alcohol they could smell and were interested in how he got his vehicle on the railroad track.  One thing lead to another and our client was ultimately arrested for OWI.  Our client blew a .14 at the station.  Our client originally tried to handle the case himself and was unable to get anywhere with the prosecutor.  He then made the decision to hire Chirafisi & Verhoff to see if we could help him.

Yeah, we could. We reviewed the reports and not only was the client not driving on a roadway, but there was zero indication as to what time the vehicle went from the roadway onto the railroad track.  Initially, the prosecutor was not moved by the argument.  We then filed a motion to exclude the breath test, and she started to become moved.  As the hearing approached, she came around.

An issue in the case was that our client drove the vehicle down the railroad tracks and simply parked it.  That could be classified as impaired driving.  So, at the end of the day, faced with our motions and arguments, the prosecutor offered Reckless Driving to our client. Our client happily accepted the offer, as his goal was to avoid an OWI conviction.

Evidence Thrown Out, 0.16 OWI Case Dismissed

In this case, our client was stopped for failing to properly signal a lane charge.  The Dane County Sheriff's Department deputy reported that upon contact he observed our client to have slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and the client admitted to consuming alcohol for several hours.  The deputy asked our client to submit to field sobriety tests, and the client declined to perform them.  He was arrested on a criminal OWI charge and submitted to a breath test with a reported value of 0.16.  Attorney Verhoff reviewed the reports and video evidence in this case and filed a motion to suppress the evidence, asserting the deputy did not have a lawful basis to conduct the traffic stop.  Relying on the statute governing signaling, Attorney Verhoff argued no traffic was impacted by his failure to signal the lane changes, as required by law.  At the conclusion of the evidentiary hearing, the ruled in our client's favor.  She threw out all evidence against the client and dismissed all charges.

OWI Amended to Reckless Driving, Columbia County

This case is an excellent example of why conducting the administrative review process can be critical in an OWI case.  Our client was charged with both OWI and PAC violations after Columbia County deputies found him asleep behind the wheel of his personal vehicle.  He "failed" field sobriety tests and agreed to take a blood test, which showed an alcohol concentration of 0.09.  The client, who has a commercial driver's license (CDL), hired Chirafisi & Verhoff, as recommended by a different lawyer.  At the administrative review hearing, the deputy gave answers that enabled Attorney Verhoff to argue the client's license should not be suspended.  The hearing examiner agreed.  As the court case moved forward, Attorney Verhoff filed legal motions challenging the admissibility of the blood test results, based off the answers to question he asked the deputy at the administrative review hearing.  After almost two years of litigation, the prosecution finally gave up, dismissing the PAC charge and agreeing to amend the OWI charge to a Reckless Driving citation.  By avoiding the OWI and PAC convictions, our client was able to save his CDL and keep his job.