New Year, Three More Outstanding Results

Forgery/Uttering- Dismissed by Court at Preliminary Hearing (Dane County)

Some people say preliminary hearings are worthless, we don’t think that's the case.  In this case, the client was charged with Party to a Crime of Uttering a forged document.  Our client was 18 years old with a bright future and was understandably concerned about how this could impact her future.  

After a review of the criminal complaint, Attorney Corey Chirafisi believed that there was no proof that the client was aware that the document she possessed was forged.  So, we did what many lawyers don’t: we had the preliminary hearing.

At that hearing, Attorney Chirafisi was able to establish, through questioning of law enforcement, that there was no proof that the client was aware the document she was given was in fact forged.  The Court even went so far as to say that if the Court would bind the matter over for trial, the Court would have to ignore the evidence presented in the case.  The Court dismissed the case after arguments.

One main point here: preliminary hearings are not what they once were.  Now that hearsay can be admissible, it has undoubtedly made it easier for the government to prove these hearings, but they are still worth having and this case proves that point.

Case #2- OWI 1st/PAC- .13 (Dane County)

Another great result for client charged with Operating While Intoxicated.  Our client was extremely concerned about this ticket, he works as an EMT and has to drive ambulance from time to time, something he cannot do with a revoked driver’s license.

He called Chirafisi & Verhoff and told us about his situation and asked if we could help.  We thought we could.  

First, at the administrative review hearing, we were able to get some helpful information regarding the stop of the client’s car.  It helped form the basis for the motion that we were able to file regarding whether the police had a basis to stop the client.

After almost two years, the prosecution agreed to amend the charge from an OWI to a reckless driving. They were willing to do this even with a test result that was well over the legal limit.  All “wins” are great, but when it unquestionably changes the course of a client’s career, it is very rewarding.  No OWI conviction, no revocation and client able to do what he loves.

Case #3- OWI 1st/PAC- .08 (Onieda County)

This client was referred from another attorney as the stakes were pretty high for the client.  His job required that he always have a valid license and the OWI conviction would make it impossible for him to continue at his job.   We got to work looking at every angle for the weak spot in the case.

The prosecutor was initially unwilling to move off of the charge.  She believed the video and client’s performance on field sobriety tests provided great evidence for her on the OWI charge.  After a close review of the video and pulling the maintenance records of the intoximeter we felt that we had our hook to try the case to a jury.

Turns out that wasn’t necessary.  On the eve of trial the prosecutor called and ultimately agreed to amend the OWI charge to a Reckless Driving.  Under other circumstances, maybe a reckless wouldn’t have been accepted, however, where everything is on the line for the client, it was an easy decision.

No OWI allows him to continue in his career, his goal all along.  Another great outcome for a very satisfied client.

198 pounds-90,000 grams of Marijuana Suppressed

Great outcome for our Client who was charged with Possession With Intent to Deliver THC in an amount of 90,000 grams, the equivalent to 198 pounds.  This case stems from multiple search warrants executed which led to a search warrant of the client’s property where the marijuana was located.

The challenge was not only the warrant(s), but the judge who was hearing the case was the judge who signed the warrants.  We had to convince the judge that he was wrong when he originally signed the warrants.  We challenged each of the three warrants on lack of probable cause.  After extensive brief writing and legal arguments, the Court found that the second warrant and the warrant to search the defendant’s home both lacked probable cause and the Court threw out all evidence obtained from the search.  

Not only was that the 198 pounds, but also all of the money and vehicles which were seized as products obtained from unlawful drug distribution.  It was a huge win for the client.  Clearly a prison sentence was avoided and the client was in utter amazement at the outcome.

OWI 1st/ PAC 1st .13- Amended to Reckless Driving

Our client was picked up because the police noticed her vehicle was stopped about 30 feet in front of the stop sign and our client was on her phone.  The client admitted to police that she had been drinking and failed the field sobriety tests.  The next challenge was that her breath test at the police station registered 0.13 which is well above the legal limit.

This case was attacked in the same manner we attack every case, at the administrative hearing.  At that hearing we were able to lock the officer into certain statements regarding why he believed the defendant was actually impaired.  We made the same gamble in this case as well, we were willing to share the transcript of the administrative review hearing prior to the trial in the case.  

The prosecutor read the transcript and was willing to amend the charge even with a test result over 1 ½ times the legal limit.  The case was resolved for a non-alcohol related ticket with a fine.

OWI 2nd/ PAC 2ndAmended to Reckless Driving

Our client was stopped by law enforcement for drifting over the center line and speeding.  Upon approaching the vehicle, law enforcement also noticed 3 beer cans lying on the passenger seat.  The police asked the client to exit the vehicle and perform field sobriety tests (which they said she failed) and they ultimately placed her under arrest for OWI 2nd offense.  Her blood test result was also above the legal limit (.095).

Client had spoken to many lawyers before settling on Chirafisi & Verhoff.  The client made it clear that she could not be convicted and we went to work.

After conducting the administrative review hearing, it became clear that the area to attack was whether or not law enforcement had reason to believe that the defendant was actually impaired.  We took a gamble in this situation and it paid off: the prosecutor, who did not have access to the transcript of the administrative review hearing, asked if we would share that with him prior to the motion hearing. Normally that is not something that we would do, however, in this situation we believed it could help the client.  

After reviewing our examination of the officer, the prosecutor agreed that the case was in jeopardy and made an offer to resolve the case for a reckless driving citation. 

Criminal Charges, No Criminal Convictions in DV case

A recent Chirafisi & Verhoff avoided criminal convictions after being charged in a domestic-related incident with a girlfriend.  During an argument with his girlfriend, the client, who had been drinking, forced his way into a bedroom, breaking a door.  The client spoke with police on the scene and confessed.  He was arrested and charged with Disorderly Conduct and Criminal Damage to Property.  He hired our firm and began working with Attorney Verhoff.  Although the prosecutor initially wanted the client to plead to a criminal charge, Attorney Verhoff was able to convince the prosecutor to dismiss one of the charges outright and amend the remaining charge to a non-criminal ordinance violation, which is the legal equivalent of a parking ticket.  Upon learning the news, the client simply said, "Am I so glad I decided to hire you."

Two More High-End OWI Clients Avoid Prison

It is not unusual for individuals charged with fifth-or-sixth-offense OWI offenses in Dane County to be sentenced to prison.  In two recent cases, Chirafisi & Verhoff clients had one goal in mind: to stay out of prison.  Fortunately, they each avoided that fate.  In the first case, Attorney Verhoff was able to convince the prosecutor that although the client was guilty of a sixth-offense OWI, she should recommend a probation sentence.  She agreed to do so, and the judge accepted the recommendation. 

The second case was a bit more dicey.  The facts were not in the client's favor.  He was convicted of using an inhalant and placed on probation.  The day after he was sentenced in that case, he was again arrested for using an inhalant -- this time after passing out in traffic while huffing.  The client originally had a different attorney on the case, but turned to Attorney Verhoff for help on advice from a friend.  Attorney Verhoff went to work tracking down certain records to see what defense could be mounted. Through negotiation, he was able to chip away at the prosecutor.  Ultimately, the prosecutor agreed to recommend an imposed and stayed sentence for probation.  At the plea and sentencing hearing, however, things started to look bleak. Although the prosecutor recommended probation, the judge, upset by the facts of the case informed the parties it was likely the recommendation would not be followed.  The judge allowed Attorney Verhoff to take a break to speak with the client to see if the client still wished to proceed, knowing it was likely he would be sent to prison.  As he walked from the courtroom, several other lawyers commented to him that the judge's comments were "brutal" and things "did not look good" for the client.  After speaking with the client and  resuming the hearing, Attorney Verhoff asked the judge for an opportunity to clarify some of the comments she made about the case and opinions she appeared to have formed.  He then vigorously argued why a probation sentence made more sense than a prison sentence.  By the time he finished the argument, the judge had changed her mind.  She agreed with Attorney Verhoff and indicated she would place the client on probation.  At the conclusion the prosecutor commented that Attorney Verhoff had "clearly changed the judge's mind" with his argument.  Another lawyer watching hearing said that Attorney Verhoff had "pulled his client out of the fire" and that he had "never seen a judge change their mind like that before."

DV Injunction Dismissed After Cross Examination

A Court Commissioner recently dismissed an domestic abuse injunction filed against one of our clients in a somewhat unusual situation.  The client's former live-in girlfriend filed the petition months after the couple broke up and as they were disputing child placement and property issues.  Prior to the hearing, Attorney Verhoff made a settlement offer to the petitioner.  If she agreed to dismiss the injunction, the client would provide her with certain property.  The petitioner and her lawyer flatly rejected the offer, wanting to proceed with the hearing. 

The petitioner provided her testimony, and Attorney Verhoff set out cross examining her using various texts she had sent to the client.  Needless to say, she had difficulty handling most of his questions.  Before cross examination could be concluded, the Court Commissioner stopped the hearing and admonished the petitioner that she should consider trying to resolve the case.  The hearing was adjourned and scheduled to continue about a week later.  Upon return for the continuation of the hearing, the petitioner and her lawyer approached Attorney Verhoff  and agreed to dismiss the injunction.

Disorderly Conduct, Resisting Dismissed Dane County

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.