Wednesday, October 15, 2014

October 7, 2014: OWI-2nd/Refusal of Chemical Test Reduced to Non-Alcohol-Related, Non-Traffic Misdemeanor

EJ was terrified at the thought of being convicted of his second offense drunk driving charge. In addition to the mandatory jail time, the 1 to 2 year license revocation he was facing, along with mandatory ignition interlock device installation in all of his vehicles, would have destroyed the business EJ had worked so hard to make successful. EJ had no choice but to fight the case, so he turned to his close friend (an attorney) for advice in finding the best possible lawyer to defend his high-stakes case. His friend provided EJ just one name: Dennis Melowski. After going through EJ's very factually difficult case with a fine-toothed comb, Dennis was able to seize upon just enough to negotiate a very favorable outcome. On the morning of EJ's scheduled Refusal Hearing, Dennis was able to convince the prosecutor to reduce the OWI-2nd charge to the non-alcohol-related, non-traffic misdemeanor offense of Negligent Operation of a Vehicle, an offense that will not even appear on EJ's driver record. The Refusal charge was dismissed completely. EJ was given one year of probation, but never lost his license for a single day and completely avoided the horrible ignition interlock requirement. Since no offense will appear on his driver record as a result of this outstanding outcome, EJ also avoided what would have been massive insurance increases for years to come. Most importantly, EJ was spared of becoming a convicted drunk driver for the second time. Mission accomplished.

Wednesday, October 1, 2014

September 24, 2014: Jury Finds Client NOT GUILTY in OWI-1st/PAC-1st Case (with .106 Blood Test Result)**

This complete jury exoneration of our client, TB, was another textbook example of a prosecutor overestimating the strength of his case. Because TB was arrested by a very well-trained, 18-year-veteran of the force (an expert, in fact, in both drunk driving and drug impairment detection), the prosecutor assumed he would just put his cop on the stand and it would be an open and shut case. And the fact that there was also a blood test result over the legal limit was just icing on the cake. In short, the prosecutor viewed this case as a slam dunk and he was not willing to give TB any breaks. But it is precisely this type of over-confidence that Dennis Melowski likes to take advantage of. The 18-year-veteran was no match for Dennis on the stand, as countless contradictions, embellishments and downright errors were exposed to the jury. The blood analyst suffered the same fate as he evasively played the role of apologist for the lab's breached protocols that related directly to the validity of TB's blood sample. In the end, despite Dennis not calling a single witness of his own to the stand, it took the jury only 37 minutes to find TB NOT GUILTY of both alcohol-related charges. TB walked out of the courtroom as if his drunk driving arrest never happened. It was the best possible outcome he could have hoped for and he couldn't be happier. To read this client's review of Dennis on the independent lawyer rating site Avvo, click here (the review is titled "Trial Experience and Expertise that is Second to None"):

**Over the last 3 years, Dennis Melowski has had 15 drunk driving trials go to verdict. He has won 12 of them (meaning no alcohol-related conviction of any kind). When we say that no other firm in Wisconsin can come close to matching our record of success, this is what we're talking about. If you are speaking to other lawyers about representing you for something as life-altering as your drunk driving charge, be sure to ask them their track record over the last few years. Make them be specific. You will be surprised at what you hear, if they tell you at all.

Tuesday, September 30, 2014

September 18, 2014: OWI-1st/Refusal of Chemical Test Reduced to Reckless Driving

As a professional subject to licensing in another state, our client, TRW, had a lot riding on the outcome of this case. A drunk driving conviction would have ruined her professional reputation and haunted her for years to come. TRW's case was complicated by the fact that she refused to submit to the breath test following her arrest, leading to a separate charge that actually carries worse penalties than the drunk driving charge itself. These "Refusal Charges" as they are known, can often be very difficult to defend, since there are only a very limited number of issues that can be raised to defend such a charge. But persistence and shrewd negotiating by Attorney Liz Majerus ultimately saved the day. On the afternoon of TRW's court trial, Attorney Majerus was able to negotiate a fantastic resolution. The OWI charge was reduced to the non-alcohol-related offense of Reckless Driving and the Refusal Charge was completely dismissed. Aside from paying a fine, TRW suffered no consequences from her arrest. She never lost her license for a single day and, because she avoided the awful stigma of a drunk driving conviction, her well-deserved professional reputation is fully intact. She could not have been more pleased with this outcome.

Tuesday, September 9, 2014

September 4, 2014: Client Found NOT GUILTY of All Charges in OWI-1st Case (with .11 Blood Test Result)

This was a major victory for our client, CH. As a former police officer looking to get back into law enforcement, a complete exoneration in court was her only option. The prosecutor was dead set against giving CH any breaks, not only because he did not want to be perceived as giving a former cop preferential treatment, but also because he did not want to "kowtow" (his word) to Dennis Melowski. It also didn't help matters that CH was the ex-wife of the police chief, who was hellbent on making sure CH was prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. The trial was very contentious from the start and it was clear that the prosecution was willing to do whatever was necessary to secure a guilty verdict. But by the close of the prosecution's case to the jury, Dennis Melowski had done so much damage to the police witnesses that there was practically no case against his client left. By the time Dennis was done cross-examining the arresting officer, his credibility had been so badly damaged that, at Dennis' request, the judge took the highly unusual step of striking ALL of the officer's testimony. The judge instructed the jury to disregard everything the officer testified to and to treat the case as if the officer never took the witness stand. Without the officer's testimony, Dennis knew the prosecutor could not prove his case. Dennis asked the judge to direct verdicts of NOT GUILTY in favor of his client, a request the judge immediately granted. All charges against CH were dismissed on the spot and she was completely cleared of both the OWI and PAC charges. It was the best outcome she could have hoped for and she broke down with tears of joy. As we have said more than once, there is no substitute for superior lawyering. It's a lesson we love to teach to overzealous prosecutors. And dishonest cops.

Thursday, August 14, 2014

August 11, 2014: Operating with Restricted Controlled Substance-2nd Offense Reduced to Minor Traffic Ticket

RF had no idea he was committing a serious crime at the time he was stopped for a minor equipment violation by the State Patrol. Thinking he would just receive a warning and be sent on his way, RF was stunned when the Trooper began aggressively questioning him about drug use. After some very questionable police tactics in the ensuing investigation, RF found himself cuffed and in the backseat of the squad car for allegedly Operating a Motor Vehicle with a Restricted Controlled Substance as a second offense, a serious charge involving a mandatory jail sentence and a very lengthy license revocation. Things only got worse when the result of the post-arrest blood test revealed the presence of an illegal drug in RF's system. Not knowing where to turn, RF and his mother conducted extensive research of Wisconsin's top defense attorneys. After interviewing several, they chose Dennis Melowski.

These cases can be very difficult to defend because the prosecutor only has to prove that the illegal substance was present in the blood at the the time of driving. Proving the drug was at a certain level is not required, nor is proof of impairment by the drug. Thus, the fate of such cases is often determined by whether or not there are sufficient legal challenges to get the blood test result thrown out by the judge. Recognizing the potential legal challenges in a given case and successfully raising them is often a function of the skill of the individual defense lawyer involved. After carefully reviewing the squad video evidence and police reports, Dennis Melowski identified several game-changing legal issues on RF's behalf, all of which had to do with the Trooper's investigation on the side of the road. Dennis brought these challenges to the attention of the judge in the form of written motions. Within just days of the motions being filed, Dennis received a phone call from the prosecutor who admitted there was significant merit to Dennis' arguments. A fantastic deal was offered to RF. The criminal charges would be completely dropped in exchange for a plea of no contest to a minor traffic ticket for lane deviation, a deal RF happily accepted. Aside from paying a $200 fine, RF suffered no consequences from this incident and avoided a criminal conviction. Another exceptional real result.

Wednesday, July 16, 2014

June 26, 2014: First Offense Drunk Driving Case (with .14 breath test result) Reduced to Non-Alcohol-Related Village Ordinance Violations

CM has a successful career as a salesperson in the medical device filed, a job that requires him to drive extensively, both in his home state and Wisconsin. Any disruption to his driving privileges would cost CM his job and would severely hamper his ability to regain similar employment. So when CM had the misfortune of being arrested for his first-ever drunk driving offense, he knew he would have to find the very best attorney to fight his case. After extensive research, CM decided that Dennis Melowski was the only lawyer for the job.

The fantastic deal Dennis reached in CM's case did not come easily. It was the byproduct of nearly two years' worth of work. Through a contested municipal court trial, to an appeal to circuit court where several motion issues were litigated, Dennis pushed the case at every opportunity. Finally, just a few weeks before another motion hearing, Dennis' efforts paid a big way. Dennis was able to convince the prosecutor to drop the two original alcohol-related charges (OWI and PAC) in exchange for CM pleading no contest to two extremely minor village ordinance violations: Being in a Park After Hours and Loitering on Posted Property. Aside from paying a fine, CM suffered no consequences from his arrest. He never lost his license for a single day and nothing will even appear on his driver record related to this incident. More importantly, he avoided becoming a convicted drunk driver. It was the best outcome CM could have hoped for. And he still has his job.

Wednesday, July 2, 2014

Attorney Singh Has A Drugged Driving Case Amended To Inattentive Driving And Also Has Two Cases Completely Dismissed


Prescription drug cases are very difficult. They require a general understanding of how certain chemicals may affect a person’s motor skills. Because of the plethora of prescription medication available, these types of cases require a great deal of research. Often, when someone is arrested for drugged driving, numerous medications may be involved. Such was the case for RLK. RLK was (and still is) suffering from a life-threatening illness, which requires a copious number and combination of prescription drugs. Some of these drugs affect her ability to operate a motor vehicle. It was shortly after taking her medications that RLK was forced to leave the house to seek her son, who was supposed to have been home several hours prior. While searching for her son, RLK was stopped by police and subsequently arrested for intoxicated driving. She contacted Attorney Sarvan Singh to help with her situation. Attorney Singh reviewed her conditions, her medications, and presented an alternative resolution to the prosecutor. The prosecutor, familiar with Attorney Singh, went along with amending the charge of drugged driving to a simple inattentive driving citation. RLK could not believe her luck and repeatedly expressed to Attorney Singh how fortunate she was to hire him. Having the charge amended allows RLK to focus on her health and working on getting better.


There are times when a traffic stop just doesn’t smell right. For example, SSS was driving home with three other friends after watching the dirt track races when he was stopped because the front seat passenger supposedly did not have his seat belt fastened. Keep in mind the officer observed this from behind the vehicle at around midnight. The officer pulled SSS over and subsequently arrested him for Operating While Intoxicated, first offense.  SSS sought out Attorney Singh to help him with his case. Attorney Singh reviewed the video, but determined it was inconclusive. However, during their meeting, SSS described the appearance and operation of the seatbelt, which differed significantly from the officer’s report. Attorney Singh had SSS take pictures of the seatbelt and filed a motion challenging the stop. During the hearing, the officer’s testimony was consistent with his report, which is exactly what Attorney Singh wanted. Attorney Singh then showed video and pictures of the actual seatbelt, and explained how it completely contradicted the officer’s testimony. The judge, after hearing all the evidence, threw the case out and SSS walked away feeling vindicated.


An OWI third offense is very serious charge. A conviction may result in up to a year in jail. That’s why NED hired our firm. He was facing an OWI third offense with a unique set of circumstances: He wasn’t driving the vehicle. In fact, the officer arrested him as he was walking up to his house. NED tried to explain the circumstances to the officer, but the officer simply didn’t believe him and arrested him for drunken driving. NED hired Attorney Singh and told him what happened, which was while his car was found in a ditch a mile away from his residence, his buddy was the one who put it there. In fact, NED explained that the last time he actually drove was much earlier in the day. Attorney Singh read the reports, watched the video, and spoke with NED’s friend who had actually operated the car. Despite the officer’s insistence otherwise, there was no evidence to show anything NED said was untrue. Armed with this information, Attorney Singh approached the prosecutor and laid out his case, essentially showing that there was very little chance he could prove his case. The prosecutor agreed and dismissed the case completely.