OWI 2nd-THC and .09- Amended to Reckless Driving

Although courts are not operating as usual because of the COVID pandemic, Chirafisi & Verhoff are still getting outstanding results for clients. 

Client was called in by a bartender who was leaving after close and noticed the vehicle running in the parking lot.  The client was behind the wheel, sleeping.  Bartender couldn't wake the client so she called the police.  Officers watched the video showing the client entering the parking lot and parking truck, never getting out and going inside the bar.  The worst fact of the case was it appeared that the client had urinated in his pants while sleeping in the truck.

There was an alleged refusal and a search warrant was issued for the client's blood.  The first challenge to the case was the warrant.  It was woefully lacking in probable cause.  Corey Chirafisi challenged the warrant and to his surprise, the government conceded the warrant was invalid.  They never raised the issue of the "good faith exception" so the court suppressed the test result.

That led to the government amending the case to reckless driving.  Client avoid jail, AODA and license revocation.

Criminal OWI-2nd, RSC-2nd Amended to Civil Citation

In this Dane County case, our client was charged with OWI-2nd Offense and Operating with a Restricted Controlled Substance-2nd Offense after the Madison Police Department arrested him following a traffic accident.  Police were called to the report of a driver stuck in a snowbank.  Upon arrival, officers located the client and smelled the odor of marijuana, though the client denied smoking.  He agreed to submit to standardized field sobriety tests, after which authorities arrested him and transported him to the hospital for a blood draw.  The blood test results showed the presence of delta-9 THC in the client's system.  Although the narrative police reports stated the client agreed to take a blood test, Attorney Tim Verhoff watched the video evidence, which revealed the client had actually agreed to a urine test, not a blood test.  Our attorney then filed a motion to exclude the test results, arguing the test results were unlawfully obtained because the client never actually consented to a blood draw.  Attorney Verhoff also told the prosecutor that even if the judge allowed the evidence, the District Attorney would have difficulty proving the client smoked marijuana before driving, rather than smoking it after he got stuck in the snowbank and while he was waiting for a friend to come assist him.  The judge scheduled a hearing on our motion.  Prior to the hearing, the prosecutor agreed that he had trouble with the case and offered to resolve the matter by amending the OWI to a non-criminal traffic ticket for reckless driving and dismissing the RCS charge.  

Weapon Case Declined, Iowa County

This matter is another example why it is better to hire an attorney before you are charged with a crime than wait until after charges are filed.  The client, retired from the military and licensed to carry a concealed weapon, was out walking on a nature trail with his wife, who suffers from a variety of medical ailments.  They came upon individuals who were walking unleashed dogs.  The dogs rushed toward the client and his wife, not responding to the owners.  Frightened for his safety and the welfare of his wife, the client yelled at the dogs to stop.  But it was to no avail.  He then removed his firearm from his holster in the event he would need to use it and pointed it at the ground.  Fortunately, the owners were able to get the dogs under control before anything happened.  Upon seeing a firearm, however, the dog owners notified law enforcement.  Two deputy sheriffs contacted the client and took a statement from him, indicating they were going to refer the case to the District Attorney's Office for criminal prosecution.  The client immediately contacted our office.  Attorney Tim Verhoff was able to obtain a significant amount of information from the client regarding his background and the circumstances with the dogs.  This was information that was not included in the police reports.  Our attorney then contacted the District Attorney's Office to present the additional information to the prosecution and to present arguments as to why, if anything, the client was engaged in self-defense and the defense of others. Our lawyer argued that no criminal charges were necessary.  After reviewing the information from our attorney, as well as the police reports, the prosecutor agreed and declined filing charges.  He also thanked our attorney "for reaching out to our office preemptively on this matter."  Needless to say, the client was relieved.

Criminal Threat Charge Amended to Civil Ticket, Rock County

Prosecutors in Rock County charged our client with  criminal disorderly conduct after he made comments about shooting someone while he was in his workplace.  The client admitted his statements reflected poor judgment, but he claimed he never actually intended to engage in any violent acts and the comments were taken out of context.  During lengthy negotiations with the prosecution, our attorney was able to explain our client's side of the story. Our lawyer argued that the client was remorseful about conduct, and he suffered a punitive sanction in the form of termination from his job.  The prosecutor agreed without our argument and amended the case from a criminal charge to a non-criminal violation of the county ordinances (essentially the legal equivalent of a parking citation).  The client, who is in his mid-60s and had never been in legal trouble in his life, was thrilled to avoid a criminal conviction.  

2nd-Degree Sexaul Assault Dismissed

The Dane County District Attorney's Office filed a felony charge of second-degree sexual assault against our client, alleging he inappropriately fondled a woman who was serving as a family babysitter.  The client was referred to our firm by a different lawyer in the Madison area.  During the initial consultation, the client's family members informed our lawyers that the client was suffering from serious medical problems involving his brain.  These medical issues could have played a part in any alleged conduct if true.  After multiple meetings, however, it became clear to Attorney Tim Verhoff that due to his medical issues, the client was not able to assist in his own defense.  In short, the client lacked the ability to form short-term memories.  Prior to the preliminary hearing, our lawyer raised the issue of competency to the judge.  The assigned prosecutor initially was skeptical.  However, the judge ordered an evaluation by a government doctor.  After the evaluation, the doctor agreed with our attorney's hunch that the client was not competent to proceed in the case.  Still skeptical, the prosecutor asked the court to suspend proceedings and an order for a second evaluation to be completed.  The second evaluation produced the same results.  Pursuant to a reasonable degree of medical certainty, the client was not competent and was not likely to regain competency due to his brain condition.  Given the circumstances, the prosecutor agreed to dismiss the charge against our client.  Although the client's mother remains devastated by her son's medical condition and prognosis, she was appreciative that we immediately recognized the legal problem and obtained the appropriate outcome as quickly as possible.

Disorderly Conduct Dismissed

People sometimes ask if they really need a lawyer.  We at Chirafisi & Verhoff think a lawyer can be instrumental in making a difference in your case.  This matter is a good example of how a lawyer can cut through the red tape and guide a case to the appropriate conclusion.  Law enforcement conducted a harassment investigation of a client who suffers from mental health issues.  Although police recognized that mental health issues were at the root of the problem, they believed some form of intervention from the justice system was necessary.  Originally, the officer issued the client a non-criminal citation for harassment. A supervising officer in the police department decided to void the ticket and referred the case to the District Attorney's Office for the possibility of charging a criminal offense that would have more "teeth."  The case sat in the District Attorney's Office for several months before a relatively new prosecutor looked at it.  Like the investigating police officer, the prosecutor did not necessarily think a charge should be formally filed.  However, the prosecutor thought "something" should be done.  A hearing was scheduled (nearly seven months after the original investigation concluded).  The client attended without a lawyer.  A representative from the DA's Office informed the client that there was a way to avoid criminal charges from ever being issued.  The client was told to complete a deferred prosecution program sponsored by the DA's Office.  If the client completed the program, the DA would not file charges.  The client agreed and met with a social worker from the program several weeks later.  Unfortunately, after meeting the client, the social worker recognized that the client had mental health issues that could not be sufficiently addressed through the program.  The client was rejected from the program, triggering the automatic filing of a criminal disorderly conduct charge.  A family member contacted our office just before the client was scheduled to have a "final conference" before trial.  Attorney Tim Verhoff immediately spoke with one of the supervising lawyers in the District Attorney's Office.  He explained the situation, discussed the client's mental health issues, and provided information about what the client had done to address the mental health issues since the initial investigation.  He was able to explain why intervention through the justice system was clearly not necessary or warranted under the circumstances.  The supervisor at the DA's Office listened and agreed.  Nearly a year after the investigation started, and one month after hiring our firm, the case was dismissed.  Having the right person in your corner advocating for you along the way can make all of the difference in the world.

Felony Injury to Cop Dismissed at Preliminary Hearing

Prosecutors in Dane County charged our client with a felony count of causing soft-tissue injury to a law enforcement officer in relation to the client's arrest following a disturbance at a local casino.  At the preliminary hearing, the District Attorney argued the mere fact that one of the officers sought medical attention for a knee injury after the incident was sufficient to establish probable cause.  During the hearing, Attorney Tim Verhoff was able to get the judge to order the prosecutor to allow him to review the officer's medical records.  Those records revealed the officer suffered a slight scrape to the knee.  But the records showed no internal injuries or injuries to the skin that would require stitches, staples, or tissue adhesive. Our attorney argued that the injury the officer suffered did not meet the legal standard of the soft-tissue injury contemplated under the law.  The judge agreed, dismissing the felony count against our client.

OWI/PAC .11/Inattentive Driving - Amended to Reckless Driving

Client was involved in an accident in the City of Madison at about 1:00 a.m.  Other party involved in the accident called the police stating our client, "asked him to hold his weed and bong.” When the police arrived, client admitted that he wanted the other party to hold his drugs for him. 

Client told police that he "took a nap" and that was the reason for the accident.  Breath test taken at station showed a breath test result of .11.  

Client was desperate to attempt to avoid the OWI conviction so, we got to work.  Client had one issue in the case, there was a question of whether or not an alternative test was requested.  If it was and law enforcement failed to comply, the test result would be excluded from evidence.

The day before the trial was scheduled, the prosecution moved to amend the charge to reckless driving.  No OWI, no revocation of license and no stigma.  Client was thrilled.

Party To A Crime Possession of 72 Grams of Cocaine - Charges Dismissed (Dane County)

The first case involves a client who was a passenger in a vehicle stopped for a traffic violation.  In the course of that stop, officers located 72 grams of cocaine in the vehicle and $3,800 in cash in the clients purse.  

Now, to be fair, the driver of the vehicle said that the cocaine belonged to him, which is helpful.  The client told the police that the driver asked her to hold $4,000 in cash which was located in her purse, which is not helpful.  The State then made a decision to run DNA tests on the baggy in which the drugs were located and the scale located in the vehicle.  The portions of the scale had a positive DNA match for only one person in the vehicle, our client.

So, now we had a client as a passenger in a vehicle with 72 grams of cocaine, holding $4000.00 for the driver and her DNA on the scale used to weigh the drugs.  Seems like a good party to the crime case for the state.  

The State moved to dismiss the case against the client.  No cooperation, no amendment.  Just a straight dismissal.

OWI/Restricted Controlled Substance - Charges Amended

This case was challenging because it involved the client having Delta-9 THC in his blood.  The fact is, if Delta 9 is found in a person's blood, that person is guilty of Operating With a Restricted Controlled Substance, whether the state can prove impairment or not.  In this case, the client drove his car into a house, rupturing the gas line.  So, the driving was certainly considered poor.

We challenged the case on whether or not there was reasonable suspicion to conduct field sobriety tests.  We started with the Administrative Review Hearing where we were able to get the officer to admit that he didn't have any reason to believe the client was impaired by drugs or alcohol.

We then took that information and filed a motion in court to throw all the evidence out based on lack of reasonable suspicion.  Prior to the hearing being conducted, the prosecution offered to amend the charge to Reckless Driving.  A huge win for the client.

OWI/PAC 2nd (.20) Complete dismissal

This case came out of Dane County.  Client was arrested after traveling to a friends residence, breath test result was .20.  However, this case was full of really good issues for us to work with.  First, the police could not establish the exact time the client arrived at the location he was arrested.  That was very important as the state could not establish the test result was taken with the required 3 hour window. Further, and more importantly, the client repeatedly told the police that he had consumed alcohol after arriving at the location.  Our investigator was able to track down the liquor store the client bought the alcohol at, which also had a specific time of the purchase.  The time on the receipt made it likely that the client consumed the alcohol after arriving at the residence.  

On the morning of trial, the state moved to dismiss the case in its entirety.  

First Degree Recklessly Endangering Safety - Dismissed 3 days before trial

This case involved a client of ours who was referred from a family member.  The client had gotten into an altercation at his residence which led to him stabbing someone in the stomach with a knife.

The client was arrested and charged with First Degree Recklessly Endangering Safety.  Once we got the discovery, we noticed huge holes in the case.  At the time of the incident, approximately five (5) other people were present in the residence.  We learned that police made zero effort to speak to anyone other than the complaining witness and the client.  So, we had our investigator locate the witnesses to the stabbing who provided statements which helped the case.  We also filed a jury instruction on the "castle doctrine" which was front and center in the case.  

The best part about the case was the state offered a disorderly conduct charge, a huge reduction from the original charge.  We went back to the DA and rejected that offer.  To his credit, the DA knew the difficulties with the case and only 3 days before trial, he dismissed the entire case.

Drug Case Amended, Juneau County

Our client was arrested and charged with possessing marijuana after a traffic stop in Juneau County.  Originally, the client tried to represent himself in the matter.  The prosecutor gave him two options, plead to the criminal charge or have a trial.  The client then hired Attorney Tim Verhoff.  Our attorney reviewed the police reports in the case and recognized that the deputy engaged in some questionable conduct.  Attorney Verhoff filed a motion to challenge the deputy's contact and detention of our client.  The judge scheduled a hearing on our motion.  Minutes before the evidentiary hearing was set to begin, the District Attorney changed his tune.  He made an offer to amend the case to a non-criminal violation of the county ordinances if our client agreed to withdraw the motion.  The client, who agreed, was thrilled with the result, as he avoided a criminal conviction in the matter.

Sexual Assault Case Declined

In this matter, the client hired our office after members of Dane County law enforcement contacted him to question him about an allegation of sexual assault.  Our attorney spoke with the detective and ultimately the prosecutor when the case was referred to the District Attorney's Office for potential charges.  Through this process, our attorney was able to provide information to the DA about the client, the complaining witness, and factual details before the prosecutor ever set eyes on the police reports.  The information we provided was not otherwise included in the reports from law enforcement.  With this additional information in mind, the prosecution agreed not to file a criminal charge against our client.  Although the process took several months and was stressful for our client and his family, he appreciated having someone in his corner fighting for him every step of the way. 

NEW YEAR STARTS WITH OWI WIN

Our office marked the start of 2020 with another great win for a Chirafisi & Verhoff client.  The Brooklyn Police Department arrested our client and charged her with OWI and PAC violations.  Prior to trial, Attorney Tim Verhoff met with the prosecutor.  He pointed out multiple problems she would have at trial, as well as a possible suppression issue.  Despite a 0.10 blood result for the client, our lawyer was able to get the prosecutor to dismiss the OWI citation outright and amend the PAC charge to a citation for reckless driving.  

Felon In Possession of Firearm - Dismissed

In this day and age, firearm possession is a hot topic.  In this case, we had a client who had a prior felony conviction, which prohibited him from possessing a gun.  The police responded to his residence and located a firearm under his bed.

It would seem like a pretty open and shut case right?  Wrong.  The government has to prove not only that the client was aware the firearm was present, they also have to prove that he had an intent to exercise control over the gun.  That was the problem, there was no way that could be established. The client lived at the residence with his girlfriend (who was the person who called the police). They could not prove the gun was registered to him or that he had ever touched it. 

This case was dismissed at the second court appearance. 

OWI 1st (PAC .15) - Amended to Reckless Driving

As the year comes to an end, 2 more outstanding results for clients. The first case involves a Dane County OWI/PAC charge with a breath test result of .15.  Client was stopped because the officer believed she was sleeping at a stop light.  As the officer turned around to make contact with the client, she moved her vehicle.  The officer stopped her, smelled the order of intoxicants and he was off and running.  

Officer reported that the client failed the three field sobriety tests offered to her and ultimately submitted to a breath test which registered a .15.  The prosecution certainly believed they had a strong case.  

However, the video of the incident showed a completely different story then told by the officer.  Although the video was lengthy, it contained information which ultimately lead to the amendment of the charge.  During the interaction, the client had a question about the alternative test, the officer then provided her incorrect information regarding that test.  Once that was discovered, it was the beginning of the end.  We filed a motion to suppress the test result based on the improper information provided to the client.  Before the motion hearing even began, the prosecutor offered to amend the ticket for costs, no fine was included.

Honestly, one of the happiest clients we can remember.

Acquittal Marks 7th Consecutive Jury Win

A Rock County jury deliberated less than 15 minutes before finding a Chirafisi & Verhoff client not guilty, marking the seventh time in a row the firm has prevailed for our clients at a jury trial. In this situation, our client was originally charged in three separate cases for incidents involving a neighbor. The first case was a damage to property claim that our lawyer, Attorney Tim Verhoff, convinced the prosecution to dismiss before trial due to a lack of evidence. The second case, which went to trial, was a disorderly conduct charge in which the prosecutor alleged that our client harassed his neighbor with a strobe light. At trial, Attorney Verhoff argued that it was actually a misunderstanding involving a security light our client was attempting to install that had malfunctioned. Due to a shoddy police investigation and a lack of communication between our client and his neighbor (who each have injunctions against the other), the neighbor, law enforcement, and the prosecutor wrongly assumed the worst. The highlight came after the jury rendered its verdict in the disorderly conduct matter. The judge asked the prosecutor what he wanted to do about the last case that remained pending, an allegation of a weapon violation. The prosecutor replied that "considering the circumstances," he was simply throwing in the towel and dismissing that case, too. Two dismissals and a not guilty verdict a trial was a complete win for our client.

Felony Battery Dismissed Prior to Trial

This case stems from a bar fight in Vilas County. The client was charged with felony battery for striking a kicking another person at a wedding. The injuries were substantial, including approximately $60,000.00 in restitution for hospital bills and time off of work. The complaining witness suffered multiple fractures and was on a breathing tube for some period of time.

Defense to the charge was self-defense. We knew it was going well after the preliminary hearing when the judge stated, "this appears to be a perfect self-defense case". However, based on the amount of restitution, the prosecutor refused to negotiate the case.

As the case moved closer to trial and witnesses were interviewed, we filed an "other acts motion" to introduce evidence against the complaining witness and his wife. Once the court granted that motion, it was over from there.

Client, who is a great guy with a family and good job avoided a trial, where anything can happen and still had his case dismissed.

Felony Domestic Battery Dismissed

Our client was arrested and charged in Dane County Circuit Court with a felony, substantial battery and misdemeanor disorderly conduct after an altercation with his estranged wife. Attorney Tim Verhoff reviewed the facts and was confident the prosecution could not prove the felony charge. At the preliminary hearing, Attorney Verhoff challenged the felony, arguing that the evidence did not support it. The felony battery charge was reduced to a misdemeanor. The prosecutor later proposed a plea agreement, but demanded the defendant to plead to the battery. Our attorney advised the client to reject the offer, as he did not believe the prosecution could prove a misdemeanor battery charge under the facts alleged. At the final hearing before trial, the prosecution folded. The District Attorney's Offered an agreement to dismiss the battery if the client would agree to plead to the disorderly conduct. Under the terms of the agreement, the judge did not convict the client of the misdemeanor. Instead, the disorderly conduct charge also will be dismissed upon the client's completion of a deferred prosecution program.