In this case, our client was arrested and charged with two criminal offenses after a physical altercation at a local nightclub. Our client, a middle-aged man with no record, had gone out on a date with his wife and another couple. He was accused of of becoming intoxicated and fighting with security guards. He was also charged for resisting the police officers at the time of his arrest. The client hired our firm, and Attorney Verhoff was able to convince the prosecutor to dismiss the case outright. Although cleared of any criminal wrong-doing, the client still may be in a bit of trouble with his wife, given it was their first "date night" out away from the kids in months when this transpired.
4 Counts of 1st Degree Sexual Assault of a Child- Prosecution Declined
This is the perfect example of the benefits getting a lawyer prior to being charged with a crime. Our client is the mother of 4 children going through a nasty custody dispute with her ex-husband. The family court matter had become very difficult for her to deal with. The client’s ex-husband was impossible to deal with and he wanted sole custody of these kids.
Then one day, her life changed: A police officer had called her and wanted to speak with her regarding an allegation of assault, against her own children. The client was referred to our office from a lawyer in Minnesota. She made a decision to hire our firm to deal with the case before it ever got charged, and that turned out to be a fantastic decision. Sexual assault of children is, other than homicide, widely considered the most serious offense a person can commit.
First, the interview scheduled with the officer was cancelled. That, in our firm’s opinion, should never happen. No one should ever speak to the police without first consulting a lawyer.
Next, we were able to obtain a large portion of the interviews and records from the on-going family court matter. That information turned out to be the thing that saved the client. We were able to put together information which we presented to the District Attorney’s office before the police got all the reports to them.
This information was coupled with our arguments as to why the case should never be charged and why there would be no possible way for the government to prove the case if it was charged. The case went on for many months with no word from the prosecutor.
Finally, after many months of back and forth, the prosecutor contacted us and informed us the information we provided was useful in making a decision on the case. The case was ultimately declined. No better news is possible in criminal law. No information on CCAP, no hiring a lawyer for trial and no bar to having contact with the children while the case is pending.
It was an amazing result for the client and shows how getting a lawyer ahead of time can really make a difference.
OWI 5TH- Dismissed at Preliminary Hearing
This particular client came to us on a referral from a friend of his that we had previously helped on a case. The client was on a motorcycle and officers witnessed him being attacked as he stood next to his motorcycle. What started off as our client being a victim of a crime, the situation quickly turned into him being arrested for a felony level OWI.
This case never made it past preliminary hearing. The prosecutor called the arresting officer to testify and the officer talked about the physical signs of impairment he witnessed with the client and how he had done a terrible job in performing the field sobriety tests.
Then it was our turn. The one fact that the officer could establish was when the client was operating the motorcycle. He testified the client told him he drove it, just not when. The officer acknowledged that the driving was unknown and because of that he did not know whether at the time the client drove he was under the influence of an intoxicant.
The burden of proof at a preliminary hearing is probable cause, a very easy standard for the government to meet, except for that day. The Court found that there was no link between the impairment observed and the driving. The Court dismissed the entire case.
The client was thrilled, once he came out of shock. He couldn’t believe in about 5 questions we were able to convince the Court there was no probable cause. His business will continue to thrive and he will be able to go on with his life. We were very happy to have obtained such a great result in his case.
Two More OWI Cases Dismissed or Amended
OWI 1st/PAC- .12- Charges Dismissed on the Morning of Jury Selection
This case is an example of why OWI 1st offenses should proceed to trial. The client was a middle aged business owner with no prior record of any kind. Police made contact with him because he “relieved” himself in a parking lot and the case moved forward from there. He was ultimately arrested and provided a blood sample that came back at .12. He hired a different lawyer who called Chirafisi & Verhoff and requested assistance in cross examining the blood expert. We did open records requests of the machine and were ready to go.
The morning of trial rolled around and as the case was being called, the prosecution suddenly stated that they were not prepared and moved to adjourn the case. The Court had rescheduled the case enough and not only denied the government’s motion to adjourn, the Court dismissed the case with prejudice, meaning it could never be charged again.
Operating With a Restricted Controlled Substance 1st
Our client was pulled over for speeding. The officer came up to the vehicle and stated that he could smell the odor of marijuana in the vehicle. Our client made the mistake of informing the officer that he had just recently smoked and that there was THC in the vehicle.
The officer searched the vehicle with the client’s permission and located enough THC to charge the client with a felony for Possession With Intent to Deliver as well as Operating With a Restricted Controlled Substance. A blood draw was completed and the client did have Delta 9 (the active ingredient in THC) in his blood. At that point, the government no longer needed to prove impairment. These cases can become very difficult, especially for an inexperienced criminal defense attorney. Luckily, the client hired Chirafisi & Verhoff.
After pouring over the video and the reports in the case, we noticed that the client said he had smoked, but not specificially when. Further, after reviewing the videotape of the field sobriety tests, it was clear that the client passed those tests and the officer lacked probable cause to arrest him for that offense.
We didn’t get to fight as much on the next part as we thought: before we filed the motion challenging the blood draw, the prosecution reached out and informed us that he was willing to amend the OWI-Restricted Controlled Substance to a Reckless Driving.
The client was thrilled, as not only did the OWI charge disappear, but the drug charge was reduced and will be expunged from his record in 12 months.
Arrested for Dozens of Felony Drug Charges, but No Conviction
This case is yet another example of why a person should hire a lawyer well before charges are filed. Our client, a high school student about to start college, was arrested by local law enforcement after authorities found a variety of controlled substances in his backpack. He was taken to jail and booked in on 15 felony counts of possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance. His family turned to Chirafisi & Verhoff for assistance. Attorney Tim Verhoff immediately contacted the Dane County District Attorney's Office and arranged for a bail hearing. The client was released from jail that same day on a signature bond and avoided spending a long, holiday weekend in custody. The next court date was scheduled approximately two weeks later. During that time, Attorney Verhoff coordinated a meeting with the prosecutor assigned to make the charging decision in the case. The prosecutor initially planned to file multiple felony charges against the client. But after discussing the situation, the prosecutor agreed to file misdemeanor charges. He also agreed to resolve the case with a deferred prosecution, meaning all charges will be dismissed once the client completes the program.
Client Avoids Cocaine Conviction
In this case, the client came to Chirafisi & Verhoff after he asked an acquaintance and a member of local law enforcement which attorney he should hire. Given a recommendation, he turned to Attorney Tim Verhoff. The client had been arrested during an annual college festival held in Madison. During the arrest, police located a small amount of cocaine in his pocket, and the District Attorney's Office charged him with a criminal offense for drug possession. The client, an outstanding student who was nearing graduation and had plans to obtain post-graduate degree, was obviously concerned about the impact a criminal drug conviction would have on his future. Although he had a few previous, but minor, brushes with the law, he had never been convicted of a crime.
Our attorney reviewed the case, but unfortunately there were no legal issues he could raise to challenge the arrest or discovery of the cocaine. Instead, Attorney Verhoff went into mitigation mode. He had the client undergo an alcohol and drug assessment, and he met with the prosecutor to discuss the case a number of times. At the first meeting, the prosecutor insisted the client enter a plea and be convicted of the cocaine charge. Attorney Verhoff pointed out the problem the client would have in receiving federal financial aid if convicted of a drug offense. The prosecutor agreed to improve the offer, indicating he would settle the case with an agreement that the client plead to the cocaine charge with a deferral of judgment. By the last meeting, after Attorney Verhoff had obtained the results of the AODA, which were favorable. Using this information, our attorney persuaded the prosecutor to simply amend the charge from a criminal offense to a non-criminal ordinance violation for possession of paraphernalia, which has the legal equivalence of a traffic citation.. The client decided to accept the offer, paid a modest fine, and avoided a criminal conviction.
Felony Drug Charge Dismissed, No Conviction in Dane County
In this case, our client did not immediately hire Chirafisi & Verhoff, but he and his family were grateful they ultimately did. Local police contacted the client after the van he was driving broke down on the side of the road. Police responded to assist and claimed to smell the odor of marijuana coming from the vehicle. Authorities conducted a search and located a variety of drugs, including psilocybin, Oxycodone, amphetamines, and synthetic marijuana. The District Attorney's Office filed multiple felony charges including drug possession and possession with intent to deliver. The client's first lawyer told him the case looked grim, and he would likely be convicted of at least one felony and serve a considerable amount of time behind bars. The client and his family wanted a second opinion. Based on a recommendation from someone who works in the Courthouse, the client contacted Attorney Verhoff. He met with the client and his family, who were astonished when he told them his goal went beyond avoiding incarceration. Attorney Verhoff believed he may be able to get the client out of all criminal convictions. After reviewing the case, Attorney Verhoff noticed some weaknesses. He then met with the prosecutor and pointed out the flaws. He also gave the prosecutor with valuable insight about the client. At the conclusion of negotiations with Attorney Verhoff, the prosecutor made a settlement offer that the client could not refuse: the ADA agreed to dismiss all felony charges. The prosecutor then agreed to have the client plead to two misdemeanor possession charges with a promise that upon the client's successful completion of a deferred prosecution agreement, the remaining misdemeanor charges would also be dismissed. Needless to say, the client, and his parents, were pleased they decided to hire Chirafisi & Verhoff.
Client Avoids Felony Charge, Conviction in Stabbing
Dane County law enforcement arrested a Chirafisi & Verhoff client on felony charges of reckless endangerment of safety during a disturbance in which the client, who was alleged to be high on drugs at the time, stabbed his roommate. The client was taken into custody, but Attorney Verhoff was able to discuss the matter with prosecutors before formal charges were filed. After our lawyer met with the District Attorney's Office and provided officials with additional information about the client and the situation, prosecutors agreed to file misdemeanor charges of disorderly conduct while armed and criminal damage to property. Prosecutors then agreed have the client participate in a deferred prosecution agreement, which will result in a dismissal of all charges upon the client's completion of the program.
Felony Methamphetamine Charge Dismissed in Rock County
Our client was stopped for a traffic violation in Rock County, which resulted in his arrest for drug possession. Prosecutors charged him with felony possession of methamphetamine, possession of marijuana, and possession of drug paraphernalia. A professional businessman with a successful career and family, the client was understandably concerned. As the preliminary hearing approached, Attorney Verhoff attempted to convince the prosecutor that the pills suspected to be methamphetamine were not, despite a presumptive positive test result. Due to witness unavailability, the preliminary hearing had to be adjourned multiple times. Attorney Verhoff used this to the client's advantage and continued to press the issue regarding the felony charge. Ultimately, the prosecutor agreed to dismiss the felony charge. But there was still more work to be done. As an out -of-state resident, any sentence imposed on a misdemeanor conviction would lead to complications for the client. Transfer of probation was a poor option, and one that was not guaranteed. Jail time would cost the client his job. Through a series of efforts, our attorney was able to secure a resolution that worked for the client. He agreed to be convicted of a simple possession of marijuana and pay a small fine.
Felony Drug Charge To Be Dismissed in Green County
After executing a search warrant, a joint task force of law enforcement in Green County arrested our client for a marijuana grow operation in his residence. The case generated a fair amount of media publicity at the time of the arrest. The client interviewed several lawyers before selecting Chirafisi & Verhoff. He had two primary concerns. He wanted to avoid any jail time, and he wanted to avoid a felony conviction. Given the amount of evidence against the client, including a confession, Attorney Verhoff had his work cut out for him. Meeting the client's goals was even more challenging because the search warrant was executed properly, and Attorney Verhoff had no legal means of attacking the admissibility of the evidence. During initial meetings, the prosecutor was adamant that a felony conviction and jail time were required. But our lawyers did not give up on the case. In the end, Attorney Verhoff negotiated an agreement by which the client would be convicted and serve probation on a misdemeanor marijuana possession charge. At the conclusion of probation, the felony charge of manufacturing THC would be dismissed. And the agreement included a provision that the client would not be required to serve any jail time. Needless to say, the client was satisfied with the results.
No Child Abuse Charges, Dane County
This case is another example of why the lawyers at Chirafisi & Verhoff recommend hiring legal counsel before criminal charges are filed. In this case, a detective from a local law enforcement agency contacted the client, seeking to interview her about a child abuse claim. It was alleged the client struck her boyfriend's son multiple times while engaging in discipline of him. The child made a disclosure of abuse to officials who also observed bruising on his body. In addition to the criminal investigation, a social worker wanted to interview our client as part of a Human Services investigation. Before making any statements, the client wisely called Attorney Verhoff for advice upon recommendation from a different lawyer in the Madison area. Attorney Verhoff spoke with both the detective and the social worker. He informed them the client would not be making any statements. He then met with prosecutors several times over a period of months to discuss the case. He also provided the client with recommendations for actions that would put her in a position where he would be able to make an argument to the prosecution as to why the case should not be charged. Ultimately Attorney Verhoff brokered a deal with the prosecution in which the District Attorney's Office agreed not to formally file criminal charges against the client if she agreed to participate in an uncharged, deferred prosecution program and engage in parenting classes.
OWI/PAC/Left of Center- test result .14
This case should provide an example of how being thorough is how you win.
Our client called and was literally distraught about being arrested for an OWI. She is a college athlete and had some real concerns how this would affect her moving forward. As usual, the groundwork for the case was started through the administrative review hearing. At that hearing we were able to get the officer to answer questions in a manner that was extremely helpful to the defense. We decided to use this information in the court case.
The video of the case was also very helpful. The officer had indicated that the client was not only weaving within her lane but had actually crossed over the center line which was the basis of the stop of the vehicle. We literally broke the video down frame by frame and after an exhaustive review of the video it was impossible to see where the vehicle crossed over the center line. At first the prosecutor didn’t care and was willing to put the officer on the stand to testify about what he saw.
On the day of trial things changed. The prosecutor had some concerns about the stop and instead of risking losing the entire case, he offered the client an amendment to resolve the matter.
As I mentioned in the previous post, almost every client is very happy when their case gets resolved without an OWI conviction. This client took it a step further: She told us that it made her year. Whether or not we had that big of impact on her life, we will never really know, but for one day it felt good that the client was so appreciative for the work done on her case.
Underage OWI of 0.10 amended to a Reckless
Our client was stopped in the City of Madison for not having her headlights on at night. She had one other problem: she was underage.
The stop for headlights quickly turned into a stop and investigation for driving while impaired. The client admitted to consuming alcohol (which is a problem based on her age) and she was ultimately arrested for Operating While Intoxicated.
The client and her parents were referred to Chirafisi & Verhoff and after looking at the video and other related evidence, we felt we would be able to use a defense that frankly, we don’t use that much anymore: alcohol curve defense.
Based on the clients drinking history and weight along with the test result, prior to trial we were able to convince the prosecution that in this particular case there was a real chance that the curve defense could work. The prosecutor agreed and offered the client a reckless driving. Almost every client is excited about getting an OWI dismissed or amended, it seems that younger clients and their parents in particular are the most excited. She gets to continue her studies in college and will have a fresh start upon graduation.
Client Avoids Criminal Charge, IID at a 0.17 Alcohol Concentration
Police arrested a Chirafisi & Verhoff client on criminal charges of hit-and-run and OWI after a traffic accident just outside the Madison area. Police did not locate our client at the scene, but found him later at an area business. He was arrested and submitted to a breath test with a reported value of 0.17 percent. Attorney Verhoff contacted both the District Attorney's Office and the municipal prosecutor before charges were filed. Our client was an older gentleman with no criminal record. Attorney Verhoff was able to strike a bargain with the prosecution in which the District Attorney's Office agreed not to file criminal charges if the client agreed to be convicted of the OWI and compensate for damage to the other vehicle. Our client agreed to do so. Although the client was convicted of an OWI in municipal court, Attorney Verhoff also was able to convince the municipal prosecutor that the ignition interlock device (IID) requirement was not necessary. While the client's test result was in excess of 0.15 percent, it was taken outside the three-hour time frame required for the prosecution to secure a legal presumption of admissibility and applicability. When Attorney Verhoff raised this evidentiary problem with the municipal prosecutor, he simply conceded the IID issue.
Sexual Assault Charge Declined
Law enforcement in South Central Wisconsin contacted a Chirafisi and Verhoff client regarding a report of a sexual assault that was alleged to have occurred more than a year earlier. The client wisely, but politely declined to meet with the detective and immediately contacted our office. Our lawyers then contacted the detective on our clients behalf. Our lawyers did not allow the client, who denied wrongdoing, to speak with law enforcement. However, our lawyers were able to obtain significant information about the case from the detective. Our lawyers then contacted the prosecution to discuss the case before a charge was issued to discuss the case. No charges were filed, and the case was declined.
Evidence Thrown Out, OWI with Minor Passenger Dismissed
Prosecutors were forced to dismiss a criminal charge filed against a Chirafisi & Verhoff client after the judge ruled much of the evidence in the case was obtained unlawfully. The client had been charged in Dane County Circuit Court with operating a motor vehicle with a minor passenger. Law enforcement found the client in a parking lot, sleeping in his vehicle. His child also was sleeping in the back seat. At the conclusion of the investigation, the client submitted to a blood test, which showed a 0.03 percent alcohol concentration and the presence of a prescription medication. Prosecutors then filed criminal charges against the client.
Attorney Chirafisi filed two legal motions challenging the admissibility of the evidence. The first motion asserted that law enforcement did not have a sufficient basis to request the client submit to field sobriety tests. The second motion asserted that the client's "consent" to the test was not voluntary. Attorney Verhoff then appeared at an evidentiary hearing on the motion. He examined the witnesses and argued the motion. At the conclusion of the hearing, the judge granted the motion in favor of our client. With no evidence left to prove the case, the prosecution had little choice but to dismiss the case against him.
Stalking charges dismissed prior to trial (Dane County)
When people think about stalking charges many times they picture a person hiding in the bushes ready to cause harm to someone else. This case our client, who was a former client was charged with Stalking a friend of his.
The prosecution thought they had a good case, offering “no prison” if the client entered a plea. That was not going to happen. The case began to unravel for the government at the preliminary hearing. By the end of that hearing the trial court was unsure whether to even find probable cause to bind the matter over for trial. Once the prosecution saw that the judge was struggling to find probable cause, the flood gates opened.
Chirafisi and Verhoff were able to file motions not only challenging bindover of the preliminary hearing but made an “as applied” challenge to the constitutionality of the stalking statute.
There was no need for a hearing in this case. After the motions were filed, the government realized that the matter should never have been brought in the first place and dismissed the case just prior to the motions being heard. The client, who has very good job, would have certainly lost that job if he had been convicted. Our client could not have been happier with the results.
OWI/PAC 1st- .13- Criminal Resisting Arrest- Amended to obstructing ticket
Client was called in by a passerby who was concerned he was sleeping in his vehicle and would not wake up. The ambulance ultimately contacted the police when the client was awoken and smelled like alcohol and was in their opinion intoxicated.
The client was not very happy to see law enforcement. Because he wasn’t driving, he wasn’t complying with the requests to step from the vehicle or listen to the officer’s commands. This made the case start out challenging because the client was charged with not only Operating While Intoxicated with a test result of .13, but he was also charged criminally for resisting arrest.
Client was referred to Chirafisi & Verhoff and we got started. First thing was the administrative review hearing. At that hearing we were able to confirm that the officer had no idea how long the client had been sitting in his vehicle. That fact made the test result irrelevant.
We were able to convince the district attorney to dismiss the criminal resisting and then were left with the OWI charge. The first offer was reckless driving, the client rejected that offer as well as an inattentive driving ticket.
The client decided to resolve the case for an ordinance violation for obstructing for not obeying police commands when he refused to exit his vehicle. He didn’t lose his license for a single day, did not have to do any alcohol classes. Overall, he was very happy with the result.
APR 2 OWI/PAC 1st, 0.22, no IID
The DeForest Police Department arrested our client on criminal charges of hit and run, as well as a first-offense OWI/PAC with an alcohol concentration of 0.22 percent. Police said our client pulled into traffic at an intersection, and two vehicles approaching the intersection collided because of it. Witnesses obtained his license plate information and informed authorities that our client drove away from the scene without stopping. Law enforcement then contacted our client at his home and arrested him. Before criminal charges were filed, our lawyers obtained the police reports and reviewed them. Our lawyers then met with prosecutors from the District Attorney's Office to discuss the case and explained that we believed the government may have difficulties proving our client, whose vehicle never made contact with the other vehicles, was aware a collision occurred. This was important because knowledge of the crash would be a crucial element the prosecution must prove in order to convict on a criminal hit and run charge. Our lawyers also believed the police unlawfully entered our client's garage when making contact with him, and filed a motion to suppress evidence in municipal court. Ultimately, our lawyers brokered a deal with both the District Attorney's Office and the municipal prosecutor. The DA's Office agreed to decline the criminal charge if the client resolved the OWI case short of a trial. And the prosecutor in the OWI case agreed to amend the charge to reflect a lower alcohol concentration (resulting in no ignition interlock device requirement), rather than litigating the suppression motion. Our client accepted the offer and avoid the potential of a criminal conviction and possible jail time.