Domestic Battery and Disorderly Conduct Declined

A recent case is yet another example of why you should not wait until you are charged with a criminal offense to call our office.  In this case, police in Dane County arrested our client for domestic battery and disorderly conduct after a physical argument with his adult daughter.  The client contacted our office several days before his first court hearing.  He provided Attorney Verhoff with significant details about what transpired, the history of problems with his daughter, and other details about himself and his family.  Attorney Verhoff then met with the assistant district attorney who was tasked with making a charging decision.  Fortunately, he was able to meet with her before a decision had been made.  He provided the prosecutor with background detail and indicated, based on his knowledge of the case, a self-defense claim could be mounted on behalf of our client.  After meeting with our lawyer, the prosecutor reviewed the case.  She decided not to file any charges in the matter and contacted our lawyer to let him know.  She even thanked him for providing her with important background information, not contained in the reports, that played part of her decision to decline the charges.  

OWI/PAC 2nd Case Dismissed In Dane County

Our client was charged with criminal offenses for operating while intoxicated and operating with a prohibited alcohol concentration in Dane County.  Attorney Tim Verhoff attended what he expected to be a routine initial appearance in the case.  But the court appearance turned out to be far from routine.  Attorney Verhoff received a copy of the criminal complaint minutes before the hearing and reviewed it.  The complaint indicated law enforcement had been called out in the early morning hours regarding a report of a vehicle in the ditch. Police made contact with out client, who appeared to be intoxicated.  Authorities put him through field sobriety tests, and arrested him.  He submitted to a breath test, which resulted in a reported value of 0.17 percent. In court at the initial appearance, Attorney Verhoff made an oral motion to dismiss both charges.  He argued the complaint failed to show probable cause supporting the charges.  He argued there was no indication the vehicle was running when authorities arrived.  There was no information showing our client was the driver.  And there was no indication of the time at which the vehicle went into the ditch (an important piece of information in determining if a person is intoxicated at the time of driving).  The unsuspecting prosecutor objected to the motion and made several arguments why the case should proceed.  Over the prosecutor's objection, the court commissioner granted Attorney Verhoff's motion and dismissed the case against our client.

Negligent Homicide and Operating After Revocation Causing Death--Charges Dismissed After Jury Selection (Kenosha County)

A huge victory for our client in this case: he was charged with Negligent Homicide and OAR Causing Death for an accident at a traffic intersection.  The bad news for the client was that he had a valid occupational license but was 12 minutes outside of his hours when the accident occurred.  He initially had a different lawyer and was not satisfied with the direction the case was headed and he looked around and got a referral to Attorney Corey Chirafisi. Attorney Chirafisi was very familiar with Kenosha County, having been a prosecutor there about 15 years ago.  He thought it would be helpful to bring another lawyer on board who had a presence in Kenosha and he called his colleague Attorney Mark Richards.  Together they went to work. First, they were able to get a qualified accident reconstruction expert to review not only the statements of the witnesses (which initially were not helpful at all to the client) but also the data from the airbag modules (which was very helpful to the client).  Once the expert wrote his report, which indicated the client was not the cause of the accident, the case started to go the client’s way.  But Kenosha County is known for not resolving cases in a favorable way.  Even after the accident report was provided to the prosecutor, she would not dismiss the charges.

One of the biggest things we were able to do in this case was to have the Court modify the jury instruction on who caused the accident.  It was the game changer.  We were able to convince the Judge that the jury instruction used in all cases that have charges like this was not appropriate.  We convinced the Judge that our instruction on causation was correct and once the Court agreed, the case started to unravel. First, the Government moved to dismiss the Negligent Homicide charge.  Good start.  But it was Kenosha County, and they were still going to go to trial on the OAR causing death charge.  That was, until the jury was selected.  Once the jury was seated the prosecution came back and finally said that they were dismissing the OAR Causing Death, provided the defendant plead to the OAR charge.  We agreed, since he was, in fact driving outside of his hours. So the client avoided a prison sentence, a felony conviction and ended up with no jail on a driving ticket for operating after revocation.  Very happy to get such a wonderful result for our client!

OWI 3rd- PAC .18 amended to Reckless Driving

Our client was pretty concerned, as he was charged with a 3rd offense OWI when he was called in for sleeping in his vehicle in a gas station parking lot.  Client had looked around for lawyers and ultimately called Chirafisi & Verhoff for representation.

Prior to the administrative hearing, Corey Chirafisi reviewed the police reports and video and found what was ultimately the issue that got the case amended.  The reports were unclear as to what time the client had arrived at the gas station, which put admission of his test result in jeopardy for the prosecution.  The prosecutor initially was unwilling to move off of the OWI and wanted significant jail time and a lengthy driver’s license revocation. 

Finally, about 2 days before trial, the prosecutor realized that his case was starting to fall apart.  He was very hesitant to amend the OWI charge because it was the client's 3rd offense.  However, he did agree at the final conference to amend the charge to a reckless driving where the client paid a $200.00 fine and walked away with no revocation, jail or criminal conviction.

OWI 1st/ PAC .10- Charge amended to Reckless Driving

Our client worked at the circuit courthouse in this county and was very concerned about how a conviction could impact not only her job, but her reputation at work.  She called around and was told that she should call Corey Chirafisi to see if he could help her out of this very stressful situation.

The client was stopped for speeding early one morning.  After she was stopped, the usual happened: she was questioned about drinking and ultimately was put through field sobriety tests and arrested for OWI.  At the police station, she was asked to submit to a breath test and her result was .10.

Because this case was in municipal court, Attorney Chirafisi had the advantage of doing the trial in the municipal court and then appealing to circuit court if the client was unsuccessful.  It wasn’t necessary.  On the evening of the trial the prosecutor, who has been unwilling to amend OWI cases in every other situation this firm has had in that court, agreed to amend the OWI charge to a reckless driving for a small fine.  The client was thrilled, she did not have concerns about losing her job or having to explain the conviction to the other people in the courthouse.

OWI 1st/ PAC .13, Reckless Driving

Our client called Chirafisi & Verhoff after being accused of drunk driving while smashing his vehicle into his garage damaging the actual structure of the building. Our client was worried because if he had his driving privileges suspended for even a single day, it would cost him his job.  He called Attorney Corey Chirafisi to see what could be done.

The groundwork was laid at the administrative suspension review hearing for our Motion.  The police had a time of operation, since someone witnessed the client strike the building, but the question was did the police have a basis to go into the house without a warrant?  In this firm's opinion, the Supreme Court of Wisconsin has broadened the community caretaker role of the police in this state to the point of ridiculousness. This was a big concern for Attorney Chirafisi, so at the administrative hearing, Attorney Chirafisi was able to get the necessary information from the officer to file the Motion challenging entry into the home.

On the morning of the motion hearing, the prosecutor called (and even though the law is as bad as it is for the defendant’s on this issue) they indicated that they believed it was possible that based on Attorney Chirafisi's Motion, they may lose the case entirely.  The prosecutor then offered to dismiss the OWI and PAC charge for a plea to the reckless driving ticket.  Our client was able to save his career as his license was never suspended.

OWI & PAC 1st, THC charges all dismissed

Our client had been stopped by police for allegedly swerving in an unsafe manner around two squad cars that were involved in the stop of a different vehicle.  The police began following our client and also believed that she had deviated outside of her lane onto the shoulder of the roadway.  During the contact with the client, marijuana was located on her person and she was charged with possession of THC as well.

The client didn’t really believe that she could beat the case.  Her friend had used Attorney Corey Chirafisi previously and told the client to give him a call to see what he could do to help.

Attorney Chirafisi started out through the administrative review hearing by locking the officer into certain statements that proved to be the tipping point in the case.  After that administrative hearing, Attorney Chirafisi watched the video and noted that the information provided by the officer at the administrative hearing did not match what was clearly on the video.

The prosecutor realized that there could be some problems; and without ever filing a motion, Attorney Chirafisi convinced the State to dismiss the OWI/PAC and THC charges.  In exchange for the dismissal, the client agreed to pay a $187.00 ticket.  She was more than happy, especially since when the case began, she had no real hopes of being successful.  It's cases like these which should serve as a reminder to all that talking to an experienced lawyer who knows OWI defense is always a good idea.

Felony Drug Arrest but No Criminal Conviction in Dane County

As a 19-year old, soon-to-be college student, our client's arrest on felony charges for possession with intent to deliver marijuana cast her future in doubt.  Law enforcement contacted our client in the early morning hours after a resident reported a suspicious vehicle in their neighborhood.  Our client and a passenger admitted to smoking marijuana in the vehicle minutes before police arrived on scene.  Upon searching the car, police found marijuana, smoking devices, paraphernalia, and various packaging materials.  They also found one ecstasy pill. The client was arrested and taken to jail on felony charges of possession with intent to deliver THC.  She immediately hired Chirafisi & Verhoff to help.  Our lawyers contacted the District Attorney's Office.  Attorney Verhoff was able present information to the lawyer tasked with making a charging decision.  He explained why what was located in the vehicle was consistent with someone who used marijuana, but did not sell it.  Convinced, the prosecutor agreed not to charge a felony for dealing.  Instead, the prosecutor filed a misdemeanor charges of possession of THC, possession of a controlled substance for the ecstasy, and possession of drug paraphernalia.  But Attorney Verhoff was not done.  The case was then assigned to a different prosecutor to handle in court.  After several meetings between the lawyers, the assigned prosecutor conceded he could not prove it was our client's ecstasy versus the passenger's ecstasy.  Still, the prosecutor wanted the client to plead to the marijuana and paraphernalia charges.  Attorney Verhoff pressed on and argued the case was worth no more than a non-criminal citation for casual possession of marijuana.  Finally, the prosecutor gave up and agreed to amend the charges to a non-criminal violation with a penalty of only court costs, not even a fine.

Dane County Client Avoids Felony OWI Charge at a 0.31 Test and Crash

Our client was involved in a traffic crash, striking a vehicle from behind, which resulted in a chain reaction.  Authorities responded to the scene and smelled an odor of intoxicants coming from our client, who admitted to consuming alcohol before the crash.  Due to injuries, the client could not fully perform field sobriety tests.  He agreed to a preliminary breath test (PBT), which registered 0.13 percent.  Authorities transported him to a local hospital, and he agreed to a blood test with a reported value of 0.31 percent.  One of the other drivers also was transported to a local hospital, reporting a headache and general pain.  He was later diagnosed with a concussion.  The client immediately hired Chirafisi & Verhoff.  He made it clear that he needed to avoid a felony charge and conviction at all costs, as a felony would have catastrophic consequences on his family.  Even before the test results came back from the laboratory, Attorney Verhoff began negotiating the case with prosecutors.  The other driver had suffered an injury that could form the basis to file a felony charge, but Attorney Verhoff argued that the delay in diagnosis meant he could attack it. In addition, Attorney Verhoff obtained maintenance records for the laboratory equipment used to test the client's blood.  He learned that the laboratory was having two different mechanical problems with equipment in the days leading up to the client's test, and the equipment had to be taken off-line for repair days after the client's test.  Attorney Verhoff argued, given the difference between the PBT and blood test results, the 0.31 blood test may have been faulty due to mechanical problems in the laboratory.  In addition, given the timing of the client's last drink and his body weight, it was possible he was under a 0.08 percent at the time of operation.  In the end, the prosecution agreed not to charge the client with a felony crime, but simply a misdemeanor OWI-2nd.  The client ultimately entered a plea and was convicted of the charge, but considered it a huge victory under the circumstances.

Felony Drug Manufacturing/Maintaining Charges Dismissed in Rock County

What started as a seemingly benign "unlawful fishing" case rapidly turned into a multi-count, felony drug case for one recent Chirafisi & Verhoff client.  DNR wardens contacted the client on suspicion that he was illegally trapping and transporting minnows.  After contacting him, the wardens asked if they could go to his property to "have a look around."  The client felt pressure and consented.  Once on the property, authorities smelled the strong odor of marijuana coming from a shed.  They then obtained search warrants and located a marijuana grow operation.  After authorities took the client to jail, prosecutors charged him with two felony crimes, manufacturing THC and maintaining a drug trafficking dwelling.  The client was particularly concerned because a felony conviction would jeopardize his long-time job.  Through the course of negotiations, Attorney Verhoff was able to point out evidence to prosecutors to support his argument that while the client grew marijuana, he did so only for personal use to manage pain symptoms. Ultimately, Attorney Verhoff was able to convince the prosecution to dismiss the felony charges and allow the client to be convicted of low-level, misdemeanor possession of marijuana charges.

Client Pulls False Fire Alarm, No Criminal Conviction

Authorities contacted our client after he was alleged to have pulled a fire alarm at the UW-Madison Memorial Union.  Police reviewed a surveillance video and spoke with witnesses who identified our client.  Before making a statement to law enforcement, the client contacted Chirafisi & Verhoff.  Our lawyers worked with the police to make sure they did not physically arrest our client.  The client, a recent college graduate, was concerned about how the case would impact his future if convicted of a crime.  Although prosecutors initially filed a misdemeanor criminal charge Attorney Verhoff brokered a deal with prosecutors by which the charge was amended to a non-criminal violation with the legal equivalency of a parking ticket.  Yet another example of a Chirafisi & Verhoff client who avoided a criminal conviction after being charged. 

Child Abuse Case Declined

In this case, the client contacted Chirafisi & Verhoff after receiving a referral to our office from a different criminal defense lawyer in the Madison area.  Detectives wanted to speak with the client about a potential child abuse case after authorities became aware of bruising on a toddler.  Rather than speaking with law enforcement and representatives from human services, the client took our advice and invoked his constitutional right to remain silent.  Having obtained statements from other family members, who reported that if anything happened to the child it was accidental, law enforcement still referred the case to the District Attorney's office for prosecution.  Our lawyers then met with the prosecutor tasked with reviewing the case.  Our lawyers pointed out what we believed were problems with the case for the prosecution.  After listening to our lawyers, the District Attorney agreed and declined to file criminal charges in the matter. 

Drug-Related Charge Re-Opened and Dismissed After Original Conviction

This case is an example of why it is never too late to contact a lawyer.  Our client was charged with an ordinance violation for possessing drug paraphernalia.  The client, a young college student without a record, failed to appear at the initial court appearance in the case.  As such, she was convicted by default and ordered to pay a fine.  She and her family were concerned about how the conviction, even though not a criminal violation, would impact her future.  A few months after the conviction, she contacted our lawyers to see if anything could be done.  Attorney Verhoff spoke with the client and learned that she had voluntarily engaged in an AODA and participated in treatment after the conviction.  He then contacted the District Attorney's Office and explained the situation. After discussing the case with Attorney Verhoff, prosecutors then agreed to sign off on a motion to reopen and dismiss the charge against our client.  Once again, the client is able to honestly report, if ever asked, that she has no prior convictions.

Great Bodily Harm OWI Avoids Felony Conviction

This case is another example of why hiring an attorney as soon as possible in a case, even before a charged is issued, can be critical to the outcome.  About one year ago, our client was involved in a terrible crash.  The other driver was significantly injured, suffering a broken back, which has never completely healed.  At the time of the crash, our client had a reported alcohol concentration that was in excess of 0.21 percent.  Only days after the incident, the client hired Chirafisi & Verhoff, based on a recommendation from another lawyer in Madison. Attorney Verhoff immediately contacted the prosecution and began negotiating the case. Through his efforts, the prosecution agreed to forego charging a felony; instead, filing a misdemeanor charge of OWI causing injury.  The client later entered a plea and was convicted.  Because Attorney Verhoff was not able to reach a negotiated settlement for sentence, the parties argued to the judge what they thought the appropriate sentence should be.  Going into the hearing, Attorney Verhoff believed the prosecutor was likely to argue the significant injury and a high alcohol concentration merited a lengthy jail sentence.  Attorney Verhoff knew he would have to counter these powerful, emotionally-charged arguments.  Prior to sentencing, he  prepared and filed an extensive memorandum that provided the judge information about the client, including records to document the client's extensive alcohol treatment after the crash, her voluntary use of a sobrietor while the case was pending, her participation in alcohol awareness programs, her volunteer efforts in her community, and many character references describing her qualities as a person.  After reading our sentencing memorandum, the prosecutor indicated he still planned to ask for a lengthy sentence.  However, he decided to recommend a sentence that was five months less than originally planned.  The parties appeared at the sentencing hearing and the prosecution recommended six months in jail.  Attorney Verhoff recommended half that amount.  In the end, the judge agreed with Attorney Verhoff and sentenced the client to 90 days in jail.  Although ultimately convicted of a criminal offense, the client avoided a felony on her record and received a sentence that was approximately nine months less than the prosecution originally demanded at the beginning of the case. 

Client Avoids Felony Convictions In Two Different Counties

Our client had been working with a different lawyer when he came to Chirafisi & Verhoff.  The lawyer suggested the client hire our firm given the severity of the situation.  The client was charged with felony OWI-causing Injury as a third offense in Dane County.  He had been in a t-bone accident and had a reported alcohol concentration of 0.21 percent at the time of the crash.  The stakes were high, as a felony conviction would cost our client the job he held for more than 30 years.  Our firm went to work, reviewing the reports and medical records.  Our attorneys immediately saw the records showed the other driver was a 0.16 at the time of driving.  In addition, the attorneys could not locate evidence of an injury that would satisfy the "causing injury" portion of the case.  Once Attorney Verhoff pointed this out to the district attorney, he was forced to amend the case from a felony charge to a misdemeanor.  But things became even more complicated.  Out on bail in the case, our client was stopped by a DNR warden while driving through a park in a different county.  The client panicked drove away, allegedly at a high rate of speed.  Law enforcement also suspected he had been drinking.  Prosecutors in that county charged our client with a felony eluding charge one week before the client was set to resolve his case in Dane County.  Attorney Verhoff had his work cut out for him.  To best serve our client's legal interest, he needed to get the Sauk County case resolved before finishing the Dane County case.  Not an easy task, as cases typically take months to resolve. And because the client would lose his job if convicted of a felony, Attorney Verhoff not only had to resolve the Sauk County case quickly, he  had to get it resolved as a non-felony.  Fortunately for the client, Attorney Verhoff was able to negotiate a resolution of the Sauk County case on misdemeanor grounds the day before the case in Dane County settled. When the parties showed up for court in Dane County, the prosecutor, who had learned about the Sauk County case, was grinning.  He informed Attorney Verhoff, "Your client has a new felony case."  Attorney Verhoff told him to "check again."  He did and saw the case had been resolved the day before for misdemeanors. In disbelief, the prosecutor simply said,  "How do you always get those kinds of result for your clients? Unbelievable!" 

OWI with 0.26 BAC Amended to Reckless Driving

Our firm secured a recent victory in Madison Municipal Court.  The facts of the case were somewhat unusual.  The client, who had been drinking, called a family member from an apartment complex and sounded in distress.  The family member believed the client had been unknowingly drugged and contacted police to investigate.  When police arrived on the scene, they interviewed witnesses, including our client.  She was clearly impaired and admitted to driving to the apartment complex earlier in the evening.  However police were unable to determine exactly when she drove there. Authorities took her to the hospital for an evaluation.  Medical personnel drew her blood, which showed an alcohol concentration of 0.26 percent.  Several hours later, after placing her under arrest for OWI, law enforcement performed a legal blood draw, which had a reported value of 0.169 percent.  Throughout negotiations, the prosecutor insisted on a conviction for OWI, reasoning the client was clearly drunk when police arrived at the scene and was in an elimination phase.  Attorney Verhoff filed several motions in the case and sought to have the test result deemed inadmissible for trial. Although Attorney Verhoff did not dispute the client was intoxicated when police arrived, he told the prosecutor he did not believe the government could establish that she was impaired when she drove to the complex. Attorney Verhoff knew he was on solid legal ground to have the test result stripped of its presumption of admissibility.  Moreover, he knew an expert would have difficulty estimating the client's alcohol concentration at some vague point earlier in the evening.  After six months of litigation and just days before the motions were to be heard by the judge, the prosecutor threw in the towel, offering to amend the case to a reckless driving for a small fine. The client agreed to accept the amendment, saving her an OWI conviction, large fines, a significant license revocation, and an ignition interlock device order.

OWI 3rd amended to 1st offense- Green County

Our client was stopped for not having functional tail lamps one evening.  That stop led to her arrest for Operating While Intoxicated as a 3rd offense.  Our client was very concerned considering the substantial penalties associated with a 3rd offense.  Our client was referred to Chirafisi & Verhoff for our expert knowledge in this type of case, our experience in handling these types of matters, and our success rate.

Corey Chirafisi reviewed the file and was able to determine that a prior conviction from over 20 years ago may be invalid as the client did not have a lawyer on that case.  After much digging, it was firmly established that the client did not have a lawyer and Corey and the client were able to attack that prior conviction. 

The government put up more fight than usual on the issue of whether the client had made a prima facie showing. The parties filed motions, affidavits and briefs on the issue.  After much debate, the Court found that in fact the client had made the necessary prima facie showing and at that point Attorney Chirafisi  knew the hearing was likely won.  He was right, at the actual motion hearing, the prosecution conceded that they would not be able to meet their burden and agreed that the client would not be charged with an OWI 3rd, but rather an OWI 1st.  Our client was thrilled, no criminal conviction and no jail with the charge.

OWI 1st- Dane County – Case dismissed

While we like to tell people of the great results we are able to obtain in these types of cases, this case is a little different.  This case proves that having a lawyer sometimes is what you really need to get the results that you want.

Client was charged with 1st offense OWI when he was stopped for being in a parking lot after the business had closed late one weekend night.  The officer then turned that stop into a full fledged OWI arrest.  When the client went to the police station to provide a chemical test of his breath, he was actually under the legal limit.

Because he was under the legal limit he thought he could handle the case on his own.  He made the court appearance and attempted to speak to the prosecutor about the case.  When the prosecutor explained that the offer in the case would require that he enter a plea to the charge, the client decided it was time to get some help.

The client reached out to Chirafisi & Verhoff for assistance.  After hearing the facts of the case it was clear that the government would never be able to prove the case if it went to trial.  The client was charged a very nominal fee for filing paperwork and demanding a jury trial.  Shortly after the pretrial was held with us representing him at the hearing, all charges were dismissed.  Sometimes all it takes is having a lawyer present.

Violation of Harassment Injunction-Iowa County

Our client ad an outstanding warrant for not complying with the terms of a harassment injunction.  She was understandably concerned as law enforcement was attempting to arrest her.  She called Chirafisi & Verhoff to see if there was anything that could be done to help her situation.

There was: First, we got the warrant quashed so the client could continue with her day to day activities without being concerned that she was going to be arrested at work or her house. Then, we were able to review the correspondence between the client and the complaining witness which made it clear that the complaining witness was simply playing games with the legal system.  After the initial appearance, we provided the prosecutor with the emails and text which made it clear that the complaining witness wasn’t looking for actual assistance to keep the client away from him, he was using the police to arrest the client when he didn’t want her around.

Once the prosecutor saw the emails and text, he agreed that the charges were not appropriate and dismissed the case outright.  Our client was extremely grateful as it allowed her to continue on her career path without any further issues.

Felony Child Abuse, Domestic Disorderly Conduct Declined

In what can only be described as an incredible outcome for our client, Dane County prosecutors recently agreed not to charge him with felony child abuse and domestic disorderly conduct.  Police arrested our client, who is 17 years old and considered an adult for purposes of criminal prosecution.  Law enforcement took him to jail after he got into an argument with his father and allegedly punched his younger brother.  A good student and a high school athlete, our client's future was on the line.  Based on a recommendation from someone close to the Dane County legal community, the client's family turned to our firm for assistance.   Attorney Verhoff immediately contacted the prosecution and arranged for a bail hearing, getting the client out of jail that same day. Attorney Verhoff then met with prosecutors to discuss the case.  Ultimately, he brokered a deal by which the client agreed to engage in some community service and upon completion, the prosecution agreed to formally decline prosecution of the case.  Having held up his end of the bargain, our client can now honestly answer, if ever asked, that he was never charged or convicted of a criminal offense in his life.