OWI/PAC (.14) - Not Guilty (Dane County)

The third and final trial of August was a OWI with a .14 test result. Corey Chirafisi also tried this case. The client was pulled off the road, her drivers side tires were on the fog line, the car was running and the client was sleeping. When the officer made contact with her she immediately put the car in drive, then reverse and had some difficulty explaining where she was coming from. The case proceeded to trial with Corey Chirafisi initially getting the Court to throw the test result out because there was no indication as to time the client was on the roadway. The Court reversed its decision and allowed the jury to hear the test result of .14.

Attorney Chirafisi was able to argue that the client had made the right decision to get off the road. That her good decision was going to be punished by the state and that was contrary to what we expect our drivers to do. The client had a CDL which made the case that much more important for the client.

The jury was out for 45 minutes and found the client not guilty of both citations. Her job was saved.

Domestic Charges Dismissed, Dane County

Law enforcement arrested our client after he had an argument with his wife during which he was alleged to have damaged property in the residence. Although his wife did not want the client prosecuted, he was taken to jail. Prosecutors charged him with domestic disorderly conduct and criminal damage to property. Between the time of the arraignment and the final conference, the client took our lawyer's advice and enrolled in counseling. At the last hearing before trial, Attorney Tim Verhoff was able to convince the prosecution, who originally wanted the client to plead to the criminal charges, to dismiss the case outright. Both the client and his wife were extremely satisfied with the outcome.

OWI 2nd - Not Guilty Verdict (Grant County)

Five days after the first acquittal of the month, Corey Chirafisi was back in trial on an OWI 2nd. The best part of this case was the court had earlier made a determination that the test result (.14) was to be suppressed based on a violation of the Informing the Accused form. The State made a decision to move forward with the case, even though they were doing so without a test result.

The driving was good. The basis of the stop was a burnt out taillight. The state tried to make out their case based on the client's performance on the field sobriety tests. It didn't work.

Jury was out 10 minutes and returned a not guilty verdict.

OWI 1st / Refusal - Not Guilty (Monroe County)

This client was a Florida resident who was in Wisconsin working for her company. She is a heavy equipment operator and could not have a OWI conviction on her record. She had initially hired another lawyer to assist her, but when things weren't going the way she hoped, she contacted Chirafisi & Verhoff who took over the case.

The stop was for failing to have her headlights on and making an illegal U-Turn. She told the police she was "the least drunk" in the vehicle and ultimately refused to submit to a chemical test of her breath.

The case proceeded to trial with Attorney Corey Chirafisi representing the client. Because there was a refusal attached to the case, the Court decided the refusal with the jury deciding the OWI charge. The officer testified and had some difficulty on cross examination regarding field sobriety tests. He also mentioned that he was incorrect in his suspicions of impaired drivers more than he was correct. That didn't help them either. The client testified wonderfully explaining her thought process on the refusal and why she did what she did.

The jury was out around 50 minutes before finding the client not guilty of the OWI charge. In reference to the refusal, the government elected not to proceed on the refusal after the verdict.

Client was able to keep her job. We are very happy for her.

Finding Of Child Maltreatment Vacated by Court

While this is not something we do everyday, this was the continuation of a case that started in criminal court. It also shows the extent the government will go in an effort to get a client.

The client was originally charged with Reckless Child Abuse in criminal court. That case proceeded to trial and the client was found not guilty in approximately 5 minutes. That did not end the matter.

The county then decided that even though the client was found not guilty, they would move forward with a claim that the client was a child abuser. The client interacted with kids on a daily basis and was unwilling to accept this finding.

The case initially went to hearing. At the hearing every single witness who testified stated that what had occurred was an accident. Every witness. The Administrative Law Judge disagreed and found that the county had proven their case.

One thing we take pride in at this firm is the willingness to take the cases to places other firms are not, if necessary. So, we appealed the judge's decision. The case moved to the Wisconsin Department of Justice. Finally, an Assistant Attorney General took a look at the case and agreed with our position on appeal that the judge was wrong on the law. The government then moved to dismiss the case with prejudice. It cannot be re-filed and the client is finally free from the shadow the case had cast over him for so long.

OWI/PAC (.11) amended to Reckless Driving

This case stems from a stop in Price County. The officer was following our client's vehicle and initially witnessed the vehicle make a "wide turn" which the officer deemed suspicious. The officer continued to follow the vehicle and observed the vehicle driving down the center of the road, clearly over where the center line would have been.

The officer stopped the vehicle and made contact with the client. The client admitted to consuming alcohol earlier in the evening.

Where the challenge was mounted in this case was on the officer's decision to have the client perform field sobriety tests.

The video in the case was the killer for the officer. On tape, the officer stated that "he doesn't believe the client was impaired" before having him perform field tests.

We did the motion hearing and at the conclusion the court had requested that the parties file briefs on the issue. The prosecutor then offered to amend the OWI to reckless driving. The client who was a local business person was thrilled. Avoiding the OWI charge was the goal from the beginning.

OWI, PAC with 0.125 Blood Test Dismissed

In this Dane County case, the client was stopped by the Wisconsin State Patrol for speeding.  He was clearly disoriented but had several visible injuries, including a head wound.  After being arrested for OWI, the client agreed to take a blood test, which resulted in a reported value of 0.125 alcohol concentration. By all appearances, it seemed the client had been physically assaulted prior to the OWI.  Our office obtained medical records that documented the fact that the client suffered from a traumatic brain injury. Our firm's licensed private investigator also gathered physical evidence to support the belief that he had been assaulted within the hours before he drove his vehicle.  After nearly one year of negotiations, Attorney Tim Verhoff was able to convince the District Attorney's Office that the case should be dismissed because the client never intended to drive while impaired, but was suffering from the impact of an assault when he decided to drive.  The prosecutor agreed to dismiss the case prior to jury trial in the interest of justice.     

DV Case Dismissed, Dane County

This case is yet another example of why hiring a lawyer before you get charged is so valuable.  Our client for was arrested after an argument with his girlfriend in which she claimed he yelled at her in a threatening manner, shoved her, took her phone and threw it across the room.  After he was arrested for domestic disorderly conduct and intimidation of a victim, but before a criminal charge was filed, the client hired our office.  Although the client admitted to yelling, he denied pushing his girlfriend.  Attorney Verhoff contacted the prosecutor assigned to review the case.  Our lawyer provided the prosecutor with significant information about the client's background, as well as our client's version of events.  This was information not contained in the police reports.  Based on this conversation, the District Attorney's Office agreed not to file a criminal charge.  Instead, a non-criminal ordinance violation was filed against our client.  We also contested that citation.  And  the District Attorney's Office ultimately dismissed the case before trial.  Another great outcome for a Chirafisi & Verhoff client.  

Felony Domestic Charge Dismissed

During a fight with his girlfriend, our client was alleged to have broken her phone while she attempted to contact police.  He was charged with felony intimidation of a victim, as well as misdemeanor counts of disorderly conduct, battery and criminal damage to property.  Attorney Verhoff negotiated settlement of the case with the prosecutor.  He convinced the District Attorney's Office to dismiss the felony charge outright.  On the remaining charges, he was able to get the prosecutor to agree to a deferred prosecution agreement, meaning the remaining charges will be dismissed after a period of time, provided the client stays out of trouble.  Our client, who lives in a different state, had no prior criminal history was thrilled with the outcome. 

Federal Drug Case- 10 Year Minimum Mandatory-Client gets time served (14 days)

This case was a multi-defendant drug conspiracy in the Eastern District of Wisconsin.  Client was charged with distributing more than 500 grams of meth with approximately 25 other defendants.  That charge carries with it a minimum mandatory sentence of 10-life.  The other problem was, when the search warrant for the residence the client was staying at (his mom's), there was a firearm located in the bedroom where he was sleeping.  Drugs and guns in federal court are a problem.

The client was represented by another lawyer initially but a conflict led to the lawyer referring the client to our office.

While the drug case was strong for the government, including recorded phone calls where the defendants are discussing drug transactions, the thing we needed to do was get the government to get rid of the the gun.

If the government was willing to admit that the firearm was not involved in the case, the defendant could qualify for a "safety valve" exception.  That would allow the defendant to be sentenced below the minimum mandatory required by the statute.

After literally years of providing the government with proof that the firearm didn't belong to the client, and proof that he had just recently flown into town and wouldn't have had the firearm, the government gave in and agreed the gun could not be tied to the defendant.

That opened the flood gates for the client.  He had done a great job since the charge of finding stable employment, finding a residence and really turning his life around.

At the time of sentencing, the government made a recommendation for 3 1/2- 4 years in federal prison.  We recommended the time that he had already served (14 days) along with supervised release.  The judge followed our recommendation and did not send the client to prison. It likely saved his future.  Job saved, residence saved and chance to move forward in his life.

In this case winning the case didn't mean beating the charges for the client, it meant finding the way to get him to the "safety valve" exception which made the time served sentence possible.

Felony Hit and Run Causing Great Bodily Harm Amended to Misdemeanor without Injury

Prosecutors charged our client with a felony count of hit and run, causing great bodily harm after he was involved in an accident and left the scene.  Police, who investigated the case prior to the client hiring our firm, contacted him about his car being involved in an accident.  The client admitted to driving and being involved in the crash.  Authorities then filed a felony criminal charge against him.  Due to our client's business, he could not afford a felony conviction.  Nor could he stay in business if his license was revoked for a period of two years, one of the consequences of being convicted of the felony charge.  Although police and prosecutors suspected the client was impaired at the time of the accident, they could not prove an OWI.  Understanding our client's needs, as well as the prosecution's desires, Attorney Verhoff worked out a creative solution to the case.  Aware that the government would like to get an OWI conviction out of the case, he proposed the client enter a plea and be convicted of a non-criminal first offense drunken driving and in exchange he asked the prosecution to amend the case from a felony causing great bodily harm to a misdemeanor hit and run that did not include injury.  Spared the a felony conviction, as well as a prolonged license revocation, the client was very satisfied with the outcome.

School Disciplinary Case-Criminal Misdemeanor

Client is a freshman at school in UW system.  During the week before school began, client drank too much and damaged the sprinkler system in the dorms.  The damage caused many of the sprinklers in the dorm rooms of students to go off, damaging property.

Client had a meeting with the Dean of Students and did not bring a lawyer.  When he got there, the Dean had an agreement in hand for a 2 year suspension and full restitution.  Client, not knowing better, without parental or legal assistance signed the agreement for the 2 year suspension.

When the client showed up at home telling his parents what had happened, they called our firm to see if there was anything we could do.  There was.  Because we do quite a few of these hearings, after reviewing the statute, it was clear that the Dean made errors in the way the matter was handled.  We had to make an attempt to re-litigate a matter that had been closed.  After reaching out to the General Counsel's office and pointing out the problems with the manner in which the case was handled, it was agreed it could be reopened.

The matter was eventually resolved with the client only suffering a suspension for the remaining 3 weeks of the semester.  He was allowed to re-enroll in the university the next semester if he so desired.  So, instead of setting the clients education back for 2 years, he started back in school for the spring semester.

Also, the damage to the sprinkler system ended with no conviction .

Remember, getting someone to assist in these school disciplinary hearings is very important.  Possibly years of lost educational opportunities are at stake.  Find a lawyer to help you when you can.

Felon Child Abuse Amended to Misdemeanor DC, Dismissed

Our client was arrested and charged with two counts intentional child abuse after he was alleged to have grabbed his daughter, picking her up by the neck and kneeing her in the stomach.  The client, as well as his wife who witnessed the incident, was adamant that the daughter exaggerated the situation.  Attorney Verhoff advised the client to enroll in a parenting class while the case was pending.  Over the course of many months, he worked on the prosecutor, pointing out inconsistencies with the child's report.  He also presented the prosecutor with the positive reports from the classes.  While the client admitted he handled the incident poorly, he pointed out it happened during the course of discipline. For a long time, the prosecution insisted that the client either plead to the felony charges or go to trial.  In most cases, lawyers don't let their clients speak directly to the prosecutor.  But in this case Attorney Verhoff suspected he could convince the prosecutor to change his mind if he spoke directly to the client.  Our attorney had the client and his wife sit in on a meeting with the him and prosecutor.  They answered several of the prosecutors questions and presented information directly to him.  As suspected, the meeting was fruitful and the prosecutor ultimately agreed to our attorney's proposed resolution.  The District Attorney amended the felony child abuse charges to counts of misdemeanor disorderly conduct.  The client was offered the chance to participate in a deferred prosecution program, after which the remaining misdemeanors will be dismissed.

Sauk County Judge Throws Out Evidence, OWI at 0.179 Dismissed

At approximately 2:00 a.m. on recent weekend, our client was driving in downtown Baraboo.  She was waiting at a stop light with her turn signal activated.  Unfortunately, she failed to drive forward for approximately 11 seconds after the light turned green.  A police officer traveling behind her conducted a traffic stop.  Based on his interactions with the client, the officer asked her to do field sobriety tests.  She was ultimately arrested and submitted to a breath test, which lead to a reported value of 0.179.  Attorney Tim Verhoff filed a suppression motion, arguing that the client had not committed any driving infractions prior to the stop, and the officer lacked reasonable suspicion to stop her for driving under the influence.  After our attorney cross examined the police officer at an evidentiary hearing, the judge agreed and ruled in favor of our client, forcing the prosecutor to dismiss both the OWI charge and the PAC charge.  Once again, our attorney received one of the highest compliments a defense attorney can receive.  At the conclusion of the case, the arresting officer approached Attorney Verhoff and told him what a fantastic job he had done, as well as how much he learned by being cross-examined by our lawyer. 

OWI-Restricted Controlled Substance, Amended to Reckless Driving (Dane County)

This case involved a client initially stopped for speeding.  That speeding stop then turned into much more.  THC was found on her person and in the vehicle.  The client also admitted to smoking THC approximately 1 hour prior to the stop and her blood did contain Delta-9, the active ingredient in THC.  Our approach initially involved filing motions challenging probable cause for the arrest for OWI, based upon the client passing all of the field sobriety tests.  The real problem was the fact that the client admitted to recently smoking THC and the fact it was present in her blood.We litigated the case in municipal court, winning the restricted controlled substance charge, which was huge for the case.  We lost the OWI, but knew that on appeal, the prosecution would never be able to prove that charge. As the matter got closer to trial, the prosecutor offered to dismiss all the other tickets still remaining and amend the OWI to a charge of reckless driving.  The client was shocked a little, but realized how great of the result this was for her.

Embezzlement, Not Guilty Verdict (Racine County)

This case was a co-defendant case involving a husband and wife who previously worked for a construction business.  We tried the case with Attorney Mark Richards, who represented the husband, and our firm handled the wife's case.  The allegation involved the couple stealing upwards of $80,000 without the owners permission.

After the case was dismissed once, finally the matter was ready for trial.  We became involved after the wife had dismissed her first attorney.  The trial lasted for 3 days.  In all honesty, the defense (both attorneys) completely dominated the trial, so much that on the final day of trial, the prosecutor admitted that he was not arguing that the couple had taken what was initially alleged, but he was reducing it by 2/3.The jury was out for less than 2 hours before returning a not guilty verdict for both clients. 

Our client wrote us a nice note: "Just wanted to express my gratitude for what you did for us.  You put your heart and soul into our defense and for that I am so appreciative.  In my prayers I thank the parents who brought you onto this earth.  How proud of you they must be.  Thank you to your wife and children who were without you while you were in Racine helping me.  I will never forget the length you went to in pleading our case."

Injunction Petition Denied, Dane County

In this case, a female colleague of our client sought an injunction against him after she alleged he engaged in inappropriate behavior with her during a business trip.  The client hired Attorney Tim Verhoff on the advice of another, local lawyer.  At the injunction hearing, the petitioner testified.  She stated that she suspected our client drugged her before escorting her to her hotel room and kissing her against her will.  She also claimed he contacted her multiple times after the incident.  The client denied the accusations.  Our lawyer cross examined the petitioner and got her to admit under oath that she consumed more than a half-dozen mixed drinks and a significant amount of wine during the evening.  She agreed she was extremely intoxicated and did not fully recall what happened in the room.  She also admitted she had no reason to believe our client actually assaulted her.  Before Attorney Verhoff could even finish his cross examination of the petitioner, the judge intervened.  The judge concluded that she had heard enough and denied the petitioners request for an injunction. 

Negligent Handling of a Firearm (Dane County) DISMISSED

Case #3: This case involved a successful business women who was really attempting to do the right thing and was charged with a crime. Our client was at her apartment when there was a disturbance outside.  One of the people at her apartment went outside and, without her knowledge, obtained a handgun because they feared the person causing the disturbance would cause them harm.  After the incident calmed down, the firearm was brought into our client's residence.  She became very upset that a gun was in her home and picked the gun up to remove it from her home and place it outside.  The gun discharged in the residence and the police were called.  Once we got involved, we pointed out the facts mentioned above, including the fact the government had incorrectly charged the case, and could not meet their burden of proof.  The government agreed and dismissed the case

OWI/PAC .10 to Reckless (Dane County)

Case #2 - OWI/PAC .10 (Dane County)

This case came to us from another lawyer in town.  As normal practice, we did the Administrative Review hearing and got the information we needed for a motion to challenge the test result.  We have said over and over again that the administrative review hearing is a great way to learn information about your case.  That was true here.  We were able to challenge the stop of the vehicle as well as the basis to conduct field sobriety tests.  Once the prosecutor saw the motions, he made a decision to offer a reckless driving.  Client never lost her license and never had to explain to her employer about her case.

3 More Outstanding Results- 2 OWI charges amended to finish the year

Case #1- OWI/Refusal-Amended to Reckless Driving (Dane County) 

When people call us and tell us that their case is "hopeless", most of the time the facts of the case are not as bad as they say.  Except here.  In this case, most of the facts were against the client.  Poor driving, excessive speed, failed field sobriety tests and a refusal to submit to a breath test.  Worst of all, our client had a license from a state (IL) where he would be facing a lengthy revocation if he was convicted of the OWI.  The great news for the client was, Chirafisi & Verhoff has been extremely successful against this particular prosecutor in multiple cases in the past and there has been a hesitation to litigate issues against us.

We believe that most of the time, the refusal drives the OWI charge, meaning if there is a way around the refusal, the OWI will fall as well.

So, we went after the refusal first.  It wasn't that difficult when we started.  We questioned whether the information provided to the client on the Informing the Accused form was correct.  The prosecutor agreed that a problem existed and quickly agreed to amend the OWI to reckless driving and to dismiss the refusal.  The client's license was saved.  

Stay tuned for our two other awesome end of 2018 results on Monday!