OWI/OWRCS- Dismissed-Grant County

Continuing with the previous post. What we didn't mention was that the client was also arrested and charged with Operating a Motor Vehicle While Intoxicated and With a Detectable Amount of THC in his blood.

During the motion hearing on the illegal seizure, the officer stated that he observed the client have "restricted pupils" and he was stopped in front of a known drug user’s residence. The Court found that the officer not only did not have a basis to continue with the detention of the client, the officer did not have a basis to believe the client was under the influence of drugs or that he had recently used drugs.

We have had a recent string of cases in which the state does not even bother to argue the motion, this was one of those times. The state conceded the motion and simply moved to dismiss the charges.

It was a good day.

15 Pounds of Marijuana - All Evidence Suppressed (Grant County)

Interesting case, fantastic results. Client was pulled over for having the wrong license plates on his vehicle. Once he was pulled over, the officer determined the title of the vehicle was also incorrect. So he suspected something more was going on. So, he called for a drug dog.

We reviewed the video of the interaction and determined that the officer intentionally delayed filling out the paperwork to allow the dog to show up. Once the dog appeared, it “hit” on the vehicle and police discovered 15 pounds of marijuana in the back seat.

We had a motion hearing with briefing on the issue and after all was said and done, the court agreed that the police unlawfully extended the detention and suppressed all the evidence.

OWI 1st/PAC .12 - Case dismissed

Huge win for client as he is an over the road truck driver who would have lost his job if he was convicted of an OWI charge.

Client was stopped for a loud muffler at 11:30 p.m. State trooper indicated he smelled an odor of intoxicants and the client admitted to having "a few" beers. Cop got client out to perform field sobriety tests.

Corey Chirafisi challenged the officer's decision to request field sobriety testing arguing that there was not reasonable suspicion to believe the client was impaired. After the hearing, the court made the finding that the officer did not have reasonable suspicion to request field sobriety tests and the court suppressed all the evidence. The state immediately moved to dismiss all charges.

Client was literally shaking. So happy we could help him save his job.

OWI 2nd/PAC .14 - Court suppresses test result

We have always said that we believe our results in cases are uncommon. Well, last week should help us back up that statement.

We believe that if a lawyer really works an OWI case, good things can happen. Client was pulled over for pulling out in front of a police officer. Officer said he smelled the odor of alcohol, client admitted to drinking and off the case went.

After the client was arrested, the officer informed the client that he was being charged with an OWI 1st offense, which turned out not to be correct. The client had a prior conviction that was within the 10 year look back period, therefore, it was not a first, rather a 2nd offense.

Corey Chirafisi filed a motion challenging the consent provided by the client to the blood sample based on the mis-information provided by the officer. After the motion hearing and briefing to the court, the court found that in fact the consent was coerced and the court suppressed the results.

The case has not concluded yet, however, we are off to a good start.

Boating OWI/PAC Dismissed, Oneida County

Our client spent the day boating with his wife in Oneida County. He contacted law enforcement for assistance after their pontoon got stuck in the weeds ,and his wife decided to swim to shore. When deputies contacted him, the client admitted to consuming alcohol throughout the day. Authorities determined he was impaired and placed him under arrest for boating while impaired. He submitted to a breath test, which resulted in a reported alcohol concentration of 0.11.

On the eve of trial, our attorney was able to convince the district attorney that he had significant problems with the case. First, the boat was not in operation when authorities arrived on scene. As such, the government would have difficulty establishing if the client was impaired when the operation occurred. Second ,the government would have difficulty disproving that our client consumed alcohol after the boat became stuck in the weeds and before authorities arrived. Last, our client's situation was sympathetic inasmuch as he called law enforcement for assistance and ended up being arrested. Given the circumstances, the prosecution agreed he would have trouble at trial. He agreed to dismiss the PAC charge and amend the OWI to a non-alcohol related violation for a distress signal flag violation.

9 Counts in 2 Criminal Complaints Dismissed. Minimum Mandatory 25 year sentence - Dane County- Over 240 years of possible imprisonment dismissed

We have been saying for some time that our results are uncommon. No case we have handled better illustrates that fact than this one.

Client was charged in a case which gained attention based on his job, a teacher at a middle school.

He was initially charged in a 4 count complaint with among other things, first degree sexual assault of one of his students.

Almost 2 years later the child accused the client and his roommate of sexual assault, adding 5 additional counts to the charges. The new charges added a twist, the allegations triggered a minimum mandatory sentence of 25 years to two counts. Meaning if the client was convicted he would have to serve 25 years in prison before the possibility of release.

We filed a motion to dismiss the case because the police destroyed an interview with the child where the child denied he had ever been assaulted in any way. We also dug in and did the “hard shit” getting experts to go through forensic evidence. That evidence established the child was clearly lying about the allegations. We presented that evidence to the DA, along with our motion to dismiss.

Prior to the hearing, which has been a staple in our cases lately, the DA simply moved to dismiss all charges. It is the 3rd case in a row, handled by Corey Chirafisi that the hearing never actually took place, instead the government simply dismissed the charges.

We believe that these results are better than other firms. We are happy to put these results up against any other firm.

The client can try to piece his life back together after 2 long years. We are thrilled to be a small part of that process.

OWI 4th - amended to OWI 1st Offense - Clark County

We have mentioned the value of collaterally attacking a prior conviction. We make an effort to do that whenever we can. In this case, the client was charged with a felony level OWI. THe case wasn't particularly strong on the facts, however, the client had 2 uncounseled prior convictions. We were able to locate the information on those prior charges and challenged the prior convictions in circuit court. After the hearing, the state conceded that they could not defend the prior convictions and agreed to amend the charge to a 1st offense.

Instead of a felony level convictions, client received a fine of $150 and was not convicted of any crime.

OWRCS #2 - Delta 9-THC present - Dane County- Case dismissed

At first blush, the case looked difficult. Client had THC in his system making the charge a strict liability offense. If the government could prove the operation of the vehicle, they can get a conviction.

The police report indicated that the office pulled into a gas station and the client's vehicle was running, in a parking stall and the client was passed out. The officer indicated she had to pound on the window to wake the client.

The video showed a much different story. The officer never went up to the window. The client opened the car door for the officer. We had the officer in a clear misstatement. Attorney Chirafisi filed a motion to suppress the stop of the vehicle.

The state didn't even want a hearing on the case. They conceded the motion without a hearing. Can't really do much better than that.

Dane County OWI 4th, PAC .25 - Case dismissed at preliminary hearing

We are strong believers in doing preliminary hearings, unless the state gives the client a reason to waive the hearing. In this case, Dane County has a "policy" of not making offers at prelims, that policy ran into our "policy" of not being a doormat for the government.

The state attempted to introduce the test result, something which would have clearly gotten bindover, however, Attorney Chirafisi objected as there was no information the test was taken within 3 hours of driving. Court would not allow the test result to be admitted.

The State attempted to establish driving but didn't know the law on what constituted "operation" under the drunk driving laws. Attorney Chirafisi successfully argued to the court that operation was never established and the court dismissed the felony OWI.

The other part of this case which will be important moving forward is, the client has 2 other pending OWI charges. This case would have subjected him to a presumptive prison sentence. Not anymore. Client was beyond happy with the result.

Disorderly Conduct Dismissed, Dane County

Sometimes the most simple solution is the best outcome for everyone. Our client got into a physical altercation with her adult sister with whom she lived. The client was booked into the jail on a charge of domestic battery, but the prosecution issued a lesser disorderly conduct charge. Prior to trial, our attorney worked out an agreement that made sense for everyone, particularly our client who had no prior record. The prosecution agreed that if our client found a new place to live, the charges against her would be dismissed. Fortunately, our client located a new apartment. We provided a copy of the new lease to the prosecutor, who dismissed the case against her.

Criminal Domestic Case Amended, Dane County

The Dane County Sheriff's Department arrested our client for a domestic disturbance with his wife. The couple got into an argument while driving. Our client was accused of calling his wife names and punching the dashboard. Our client, who called 911, told police his wife hit him during the incident. The District Attorney's Office filed a criminal charge of domestic disorderly conduct against him. Although we thought our client had a very good trial case, he was worried about trial risks and the possibility of collateral consequences if convicted of a criminal offense. Attorney Tim Verhoff negotiated an outcome that helped the client meet his goals of avoiding a criminal conviction and any collateral consequences without risk. Under the terms of a settlement agreement, the prosecutor amended the criminal charge to a non-criminal ordinance violation, which is the legal equivalent of a traffic citation and the client agreed to pay a modest forfeiture. When our attorney let the client know of the outcome, he told our lawyer it exceeded his original expectations for the case.

Evidence tossed, OWI/PAC-2nd Dismissed

Another outstanding result in this Dane County case. Our client and her spouse were parked in their van with the engine running, looking at the stars in a county park. Unfortunately, it was about 45 minutes after park closing hours.

A sheriff's deputy made contact with our client and her husband and started asking questions. Ultimately the encounter resulted in our client being arrested. She was charged criminally with a second-offense OWI and PAC at a 0.11 concentration.

Prior to trial, Attorney Tim Verhoff filed two motions to suppress evidence. In the first motion, our lawyer alleged a Miranda violation and sought suppression of the client's statements. In the second motion, he argued that without the statements, taken in violation of Miranda, there was insufficient evidence for the deputy to have suspected impaired driving, making his request for the client to perform field sobriety tests and the breath test unlawful.

The prosecutor reviewed Attorney Verhoff's motions, consulted with other prosecutors in the DA's Office and even conferred with a lawyer from the Wisconsin Department of Justice who specializes in OWI prosecutions. They all reached the same conclusion. Our attorney was correct in his argument, and the government had to concede both motions. The judge also agreed and suppressed the evidence, leaving the prosecution unable to move forward on the criminal charges and with no options other than asking the judge to dismiss the case.

OWI 1st/PAC .21 (Dane County) All Evidence Suppressed, Charges Dismissed

The great results keep on coming. This case was an OWI with a high test result (over .20). The case had an interesting fact pattern. The client was stopped in downtown Madison at approximately 11:00 p.m. by an officer because the officer believed that she smelled the odor of marijuana coming from the client's vehicle. The officer stated she followed the vehicle for blocks and the odor did not dissipate while she was following the client. Ultimately, she pulled the client over and he was arrested for Operating While Intoxicated.

Attorney Chirafisi filed a motion challenging the stop of the vehicle. The court indicated that the initial impressions was the officer did have a reason to stop the client's car. After the cross examination of the officer, the court indicated the officer's report did not match the video of the incident and the court suppressed all the evidence related to the case. The DA then moved to dismiss the case.

Can't do better than that. Great outcome for a really good client.

3 More Cases Dismissed

In the last 10 days, Chirafisi & Verhoff has had 3 outcomes in cases which are worthy of mentioning. 2 OWI cases and a possible sexual assault charge. Each client walked away with no record of any kind.

Case No. 1- OWI 1st/BAC .12- Case dismissed by prosecutor.

The client was stopped because he was squealing his tires in downtown Prairie du Chien at bar time. A police officer was patrolling downtown and observed the violation, pulling the client over. What flipped the case was the video (as it is many times). On the video, after placing the client under arrest, the officer began to speak to him regarding possible penalties if he either agreed to, or refused the blood test. The problem was the information the officer provided was incorrect. Attorney Corey Chirafisi filed a motion to suppress the test result and the prosecutor simply conceded the argument and informed the court that he was dismissing the matter. No amendment, just a complete dismissal.

Case No. 2- precharge on possible charges of Intercourse with an Unconscious person- Dane County.

As we have mentioned many times in the past, we do quite a bit of pre-charge representation. If a client believes charges may be forthcoming, we get involved and usually can help with the case right from the start. In this case, the client believed that he might be charged for a consensual encounter with a woman the evening before. She had filed a restraining order against the client. We handled that matter, got it dismissed. Then the police came calling. Obviously, the client made no statements and he did comply with a DNA test. After approximately 8 months, law enforcement called and informed Attorney Corey Chirafisi that they were not going to forward charges to the DA, they did not believe they could prove the case. Client was able to avoid any charges and the restraining order was denied.

Case No. 3- OWI 2nd/BAC .258

This is a follow up from an early post where Corey Chirafisi was able to convince the trial court to throw out the clients blood alcohol concentration test of a .258. However, the driving in the case was terrible. The video, which usually helps, was very bad for the client. He was slurring his words, couldn't follow directions and just looked drunk. The case was amended from an OWI to Negligent Operation of a Vehicle. That is great, the client was able to get out of an OWI. What was better was at the end of the hearing, the court expunged the charge of Negligent Operation. No record of any kind. Result could not have been better.

OWI/PAC at 0.09 Amended to Reckless Driving

A Middleton police officer stopped our client shortly after 1:00 a.m. after he rapidly accelerated from a stop light, causing the tires to squeal. Upon contact, the officer noticed a strong odor of alcohol coming from our client, as well as red and glossy eyes. The client admitted that he had been consuming alcohol at a nearby bar.

After conducting field sobriety tests on the client, the officer placed him under arrest and took him for a breath test. The reported value was a 0.09 alcohol concentration.

During pretrial negotiations, Attorney Tim Verhoff raised questions about the basis for the traffic stop. He also was able to produce an alcohol curve to the prosecutor to demonstrate the client's alcohol concentration was likely less than 0.08 at the time of driving. After speaking with our lawyer, the prosecutor agreed to dismiss the PAC citation and amend the OWI to a reckless driving citation. Given the problems our lawyer pointed out with the case, the judge approved the amendment and imposed a modest fine on the reduced charge for reckless driving.

Dane County Drug Charge Expunged

Law enforcement suspected our client of being a drug dealer. In a coordinated effort that included authorities from the State Department of Criminal Investigation, police targeted the client with a plan to arrest him and search his vehicle. Police followed him in his car and waited for him to violate a traffic law. Authorities ultimately stopped him for speeding, searched his vehicle and found several jars filled with more than 100 grams of marijuana. Prosecutors filed a criminal drug charge against the client. In a negotiated resolution, Attorney Tim Verhoff brokered a deal in which the client entered a plea to the misdemeanor charge of possessing marijuana. The judge ordered him to complete 32 community service hours, but authorized the expungement of the case upon the client's completion of the community service and payment of court costs.

Resisting Case Dismissed, Dane County

Prosecutors charged our client with resisting an officer based on an incident at a BLM protest in Madison last year. Authorities were taking another protester into custody when our client allegedly attempted to intervene and remove a spit hood (which police had placed on him) from his fellow protester. As authorities attempted to stop our client from removing the spit hood and take him into custody, he fled from the scene. Police used video evidence to identify the client and arrested him on a later date. The client and his family were rightfully concerned about how the arrest and criminal prosecution would impact his future, including his college plans. Attorney Tim Verhoff negotiated a settlement with the prosecution. Our client performed community service, and the District Attorney's Office agreed to dismiss the case against him outright.

Court Lacks Jurisdiction, Upholds Win for Client

We won't quit. Nor should you. This is a follow-up to a recent post about an OWI/PAC case that both of our attorneys have been working on for several months. The defendant initially was charged in municipal court with OWI and PAC. After a court trial, the municipal judge found the client guilty of the OWI but dismissed the PAC charge. When we appealed the OWI case to circuit court to seek a jury trial, we learned the municipal judge attempted to reinstate the PAC charge on his own.

We did not believe the municipal court had the authority to simply reinstate the PAC charge, and we moved the circuit court to dismiss the PAC case, making an argument that the municipal judge never actually found our client guilty of the PAC charge. Over the objection of the prosecutor, the circuit court agreed and dismissed the PAC charge.

Despite the ruling in circuit court, the prosecutor then sought to revive the PAC charge in municipal court, where the case was again scheduled for a hearing. At the hearing, we objected to the municipal court even hearing the prosecution's new motion, arguing the municipal court lost jurisdiction once the case was removed to circuit court. As such, we argued the municipal judge was now bound by the circuit court's decision. This time, the municipal judge agreed and concluded the prosecutor was not entitled to a hearing on the matter, meaning the client can never be convicted of the PAC charge originally filed against her.

OWI-6th and Motion Hearing Outstanding Results

Normally, we only post results once a case is completed. However, we had some results in cases this week that we feel compelled to share. While some of the cases are not concluded, we will make sure to let you know how they turn out.

Friday- We normally don't ever post about sentencing hearings, but we feel this one warrants mention. The client was charged with an OWI 6th offense, his alcohol concentration level was .34. That is 17 times the legal limit for the client. He also picked up his 6th offense while he was out on bail for a 5th offense. The 6th offense was in a notoriously difficult county and presented many challenges to avoid a prison sentence. One issue is the law now presumes that the client will go to prison on a 5th or 6th for at least 18 months.

By the time the sentencing was over, the client received a sentence of probation with county jail time. The prosecutor even sent a nice email to Attorney Chirafisi describing his sentencing argument as eloquent and praising him for the work he did for his client.

Attorney Chirafisi then did a motion hearing to throw out a blood test result of a client who had a .25 blood alcohol concentration after a crash. The state did not concede this motion. In fact, they called an expert from the lab of hygiene to testify about the defendant's alcohol concentration level. After Attorney Chirafisi finished questioning the expert from the lab, the court found that the testimony of the expert would be pure speculation and the court barred the expert from testifying.

Not every week is like this, but with the pandemic and courts not running at full speed, we think these results are worthy of a mention.

Motion Granted for Privileged Records of Witness

Normally, we only post results once a case is completed. However, we had some results in cases this week that we feel compelled to share. While some of the cases are not concluded, we will make sure to let you know how they turn out.

Thursday- Client is charged in a multi count complaint alleging three (3) counts of sexual assault. After receiving the reports in the case, Corey Chirafisi believed there was a motion to get the privileged psychological records of the complaining witness. The motion can be difficult to win, however, it can also provide very useful information if granted. The records are initially reviewed by the judge.

We filed the motion seeking five (5) different records from counselors regarding the past psychological counseling of the witness. Prior to the hearing, the prosecutor called and informed us that he was not going to object to the records being reviewed by the judge. The judge granted the motion in its entirety.