tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28334795374448570982024-02-08T09:45:33.233-08:00Melowski Law Real Results TrackerThe Real Results Tracker posts the specific results we have achieved for our clients in their drunk driving cases as they occur. No other firm in Wisconsin can match our record of success. Take a look at our results. See for yourself. Ask other lawyers if they have this level of success in their cases. You will quickly see why Melowski and Associates truly is Wisconsin's most successful drunk driving defense firm.Melowski Law Real Results Trackerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14139407287298455722noreply@blogger.comBlogger183125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-58228605195811363972020-03-20T12:59:00.003-07:002020-03-20T12:59:40.531-07:00OWI-1st Amended to Reckless Driving for Another One of Attorney Murray's ClientsJP was pulled over in his driveway for Speeding (65 MPH in a 30 MPH zone). Upon approaching the vehicle, JP denied drinking and then attempted to enter his residence. He was restrained and put in handcuffs. JP now explained that he did not have "much" to drink and refused the balancing field sobriety tests due to a back injury. He passed the alphabet and counting test and was then arrested. He refused the evidentiary test to check his blood-alcohol concentration. As a result, JP was charged with Operating a Motor Vehicle While Under the Influence-First Offense (OWI), Unlawfully Refusing a Chemical Test and Speeding. An additional citation for Operating Without Proof of Insurance was also thrown in.<br />
<br />
By filing a formal legal challenge to an inaccuracy on the form created to advise individuals of the consequences for refusal an evidentiary chemical test, Attorney Murray was able to gain leverage for negotiations and work out an agreement whereby the OWI was amended to a non-alcohol related citation for Reckless Driving. The citation for Speeding was amended to a non-moving equipment violation for Defective Speedometer and the Refusal charge along with the insurance citation were completely dismissed. This was a great result and JP was happy to accept the offer.Melowski Lawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07235839250439747238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-62255748465352584212020-02-14T10:51:00.001-08:002020-02-14T10:51:37.107-08:00Boating While Intoxicated Amended to Two Minor Boating CitationsJP was on a pontoon boat with his family when the boat was stopped by DNR wardens for having blue lights illuminated across the side of the boat at night, which is a violation of the law. They instructed JP to turn off the ignition as he was operating the boat. The wardens then boarded the vessel. They allegedly observed the odor of intoxicants coming from JP's breath and JP admitted to consuming two, three or four beers. JP was then run through field sobriety tests, which he allegedly failed and was arrested for Boating While Intoxicated.<br />
<br />
Attorney Murray focused the attack on the field sobriety tests. The typical roadside field sobriety tests related to balance cannot be performed on a boat. For this reason, the wardens administered the Horizontal Gaze Nystgamus (HGN) test, which had problems with its administration, a finger to nose test, a palm pat test, and a hand coordination test. The problem with these tests (aside from the HGN) is that they are not standardized and supported by the studies the way roadside field sobriety test are. Knowing this, Attorney Murray challenged the relevancy of the supposed "failed" tests to the issue of intoxication and asked the judge to keep out this evidence.<br />
<br />
The judge never issued a decision because the prosecution offered to resolve the case with citations for speeding and a lighting violation prior to the motion hearing, which JP gladly accepted.Melowski Lawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07235839250439747238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-3381265534855680112020-02-12T07:53:00.001-08:002020-02-12T07:53:12.986-08:00Complete Acquittal in Municipal CourtAccording to the police report, officers were dispatched to a gas station for a report of a male who attempted to purchase beer, was turned away because it was past midnight and because the male was intoxicated and making a scene. That was allegedly our client, JO. The clerk said JO returned to this vehicle and fell asleep in the vehicle. Officers then arrived, observed signs of intoxication, put JO through field sobriety tests, which he allegedly failed, and arrested him for OWI. A blood draw was completed returning a result of .105.<br />
<br />
When the prosecutor would not agree to reduce the charge, Attorney Murray and JO went forward with the municipal court trial. At trial, the prosecutor failed to call the gas station clerk as a witness and failed to question the officer regarding information provided by the clerk. As a result, the court had no information regarding when JO arrived at the gas station. Being aware of the lack of evidence, Attorney Murray did not ask a single question to avoid this information being put into the record. Attorney Murray then argued that the prosecutor had failed to prove that JO was impaired <i>at the time of driving </i>as they had not put any evidence into the record as to when JO arrived at the gas station. The judge agreed and found JO not guilty of both the OWI and the PAC citations. The prosecutor chose not to appeal.<br />
<br />
Knowing how to spot issues and capitalize on them is what we do. This was a great outcome and would not have happened without JO choosing to fight the charges and hiring an experienced attorney to get the job done.Melowski Lawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07235839250439747238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-14952114247003476792020-02-06T14:06:00.000-08:002020-02-06T14:06:00.811-08:00OWI Based Upon Heroin Consumption with Minor in Vehicle Completely DismissedJR was called in by a citizen for swerving and varying speeds. When the officer got behind JR's vehicle, the vehicle continued to swerve and vary speeds. A traffic stop was initiated, but the officers did not notice any signs of impairment other than the driving behavior. They performed the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus test and did not see any nystagmus. JR was then put back in his vehicle and told he could leave. Just as this happened, the more experienced of the officers decided to conduct the remaining field sobriety tests just to be sure JR was not impaired. JR performed poorly on those test and was arrested for OWI with a Minor in the Vehicle due to JR's minor child being in the vehicle. JR then admitted to having snorted heroin prior to operating his vehicle and the subsequent blood draw returned the presence of heroin.<br />
<br />
Attorney Murray filed a motion challenging whether the officers had a reasonable suspicion to extend the initial detention as the officers had not noted any signs of impairment and had even at one point told JR he was free to leave. The judge agreed after a contested motion a hearing and the State chose not to appeal the decision. The entire case was dismissed and JR could not be happier.Melowski Lawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07235839250439747238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-1581699131706926862019-07-19T11:14:00.001-07:002019-07-19T11:14:09.991-07:00Two More Amendments for Attorney Murray's ClientsCase # 1: .13 BAC First Offense Amended to Reckless Driving<br />
<br />
CW was traveling on a motorcycle when his brother, who was on a bike in front of him, wiped out. CW called for an ambulance and despite his good intentions, ended up being arrested for OWI after allegedly failing the field sobriety tests. The allegations were six of six clues on the HGN test, three of eight on the Walk-And-Turn, and three of four on the One Leg Stand test. A preliminary breath test resulted in a .147 result and an evidentiary chemical test of CW's breath, the report was. 13. Attorney Murray filed various motions challenging the evidence in CW's case and the prosecutor ultimately agreed to a resolution whereby the OWI would be amended to a Reckless Driving citation.<br />
<br />
Case # 1: OWI-Third Offense with .337 BAC Amended to Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle<br />
<br />
KK was found asleep in the driver seat of her vehicle, in a ditch, with a half-consumed bottle of vodka next to her. The recordings received from law enforcement were awful. However, because the State had a problem proving whether KK drank before or after going into the ditch (they also did not know when the vehicle had last been operated on a roadway), they agreed to an amended charge. While KK agreed to be placed on probation as part of this agreement and id have to serve some jail time, the jail time imposed was approximately 160 days less than the sentencing guidelines called for on the OWI, KK never lost her license and she will not have to deal with the ignition interlock device requirement at all. Moreover, she is not subject to the .02 lifetime restriction that accompanies OWI-Third Offense convictions.Melowski Lawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07235839250439747238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-62449519894987049722019-05-28T16:14:00.002-07:002019-05-28T16:14:28.893-07:00Attorney Murray Obtains Not Guilty Verdict on OWI-First Offense and Complete Dismissal of Companion Refusal ChargeAccording to the deputy, KW made an abrupt turn onto a lesser traveled county highway and was traveling at a high rate of speed. He then went onto the gravel shoulder as he turned left onto another county highway with the deputy behind him. He then allegedly drove down the center of the roadway, then weaved within his lane and touched the center line. Upon approaching the vehicle, KW admitted that he drank a few beers. When pressed on what that meant, he said "enough" and then admitted to six, seven or eight beers. He then failed all three field sobriety tests and registered a .196 on the preliminary breath test. After being arrested for OWI, he then refused a blood test and was also charged with Unlawfully Refusing a Chemical Test. On top of this, the Deputy also issued Failure to Maintain Control of Vehicle and Operating Left of Center citations.<br />
<br />
Attorney Murray filed several pre-trial motions and the prosecutor ultimately agreed to dismiss the refusal charge because the deputy failed to properly read the Informing the Accused form. Immediately before trial, the prosecutor also dismissed the Failure to Maintain Control of Vehicle citation as they did not believe it could be proven. While the facts of this case seem very bad, Attorney Murray was able to create a picture where the deputy was following KW for no reason, nit picking his observations, not administering the field sobriety test correctly and that sober individuals would have difficulty with the tests. KW had a lot of difficulty with the field sobriety tests. By law, the fat that the preliminary breath test was administered is not admissible at trial. Because the officer failed to comply with the implied consent law, the fact that KW refused was also inadmissible.<br />
<br />
It took the jury 45 minutes to find KW Not Guilty of the OWI with no dissenting juror. While KW was convicted of the Operating Left of Center citation, he could not be happier and neither could we.Melowski Lawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07235839250439747238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-22995462024800529562018-08-15T18:07:00.004-07:002018-08-15T18:07:53.922-07:00Attorney Murray Obtains Outstanding Results in Seven First Offense Cases<b>Case # 1: OWI/PAC-First Offense with Accident Amended to Reckless Driving</b><div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
DM was driving home when he turned left at an intersection and struck the side of an oncoming vehicle. When police arrived, the officer alleged that he noticed DM initially pulled out a credit card instead of his driver's license, had slow and slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, a moderate odor of intoxicants coming from his breath and that DM was slow to respond to questions. DM allegedly failed the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus and One Leg Stand field sobriety tests, but passed the Walk and Turn test. However, one of the more difficult facts was that DM initially told the officer that he had two beers over two hours. Later, he changed his story and stated that he had been drinking for about three and a half hours and that he had three mixed drinks during this time. The Intoximeter EC/IR II test result of .09 g/210L did not help either.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
By focusing on the one passed field sobriety test, that DM had no balance issues other than during the One Leg Stand test, that the weather was bitter cold, that DM was cooperative, etc., and by providing an expert report demonstrating that at the time of driving that DM would have actually been below the legal limit of .08, Attorney Murray was ultimately able to convince the prosecutor to amend the charge. DM was very pleased but it did not stop there.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The Reckless Driving ticket carried six demerit points, which would have put DM into a demerit points suspension with the Department of Transportation. Knowing this, Attorney Murray was able to go back and reopen DM's most recent speeding ticket with a different court and had it amended down, saving DM's license. This kind of dedication is what you can expect from our firm.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>Case # 2: OWI-First Offense Amended to Reckless Driving Ticket</b></div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
Officers were dispatched to a residence after the caller stated that BB showed up in his truck, had been drinking and would not leave. The caller said that BB had called and texted so frequently that day that she blocked him and that his snapchats showed him holding red solo cups with bottles of alcohol in his possession and some of the messages stated that he was going to drink the night away.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Police stopped BB's vehicle down the road a ways and BB denied that he had drank anything in the last six hours. THe officer alleged that he noticed the moderate odor of alcohol and red, bloodshot and glossy eyes, as well as an unusually relaxed demeanor of BB. BB then allegedly failed the field sobriety test and a preliminary breath test returned a result of .099. However, the Intoximeter EC/IR II test result came back at .06 g/210L.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Unfortunately, this was the reverse of DM's case above because the prosecutor's argument was that BB would have been above the legal limit at the time of driving as confirmed by the preliminary breath test and his statement that he had not consumed any alcohol in six hours. Regardless, rather than slugging the case out in court with Attorney Murray, the prosecutor agreed to amend the OWI to a ticket for Reckless Driving. Another happy client.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>Case # 3: OWI-First Offense Completely Dismissed</b></div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
This was an easier case. The Intoximeter EC/IR II result was .05 g/210L. While there were some difficult facts that led the arresting officer to issue the OWI charge in the first place, rather than accepting some type of amended charge, Attorney Murray was able to have the charge completely dismissed. SS could not have received a better result. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>Case # 4: OWI/PAC-First Offense with .142 Blood Test Amended to Inattentive Drivng for Client with Commercial Driver's License</b></div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
This was not an easy case. JT left a festival in his pickup truck and an officer noticed he did not stop at the red flashing lights at an intersection. The officer went to turn around and lost sight of the vehicle momentarily, but then heard a loud crash. When the officer turned around a corner, he saw a tree had been badly damaged and saw JT's truck continuing down the road with the bumper dragging along the ground. JT failed the field sobriety tests. The preliminary breath test result came back at .133 and the evidentiary blood draw came back at .142. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
After approximately seven months of fighting the charges and shortly before the trial, it was discovered that the arresting officer had moved to a different state. While the prosecutor could have issued a subpoena to bring the arresting officer back to court for the trial, the case ultimately settled with the OWI charge being amended to Inattentive Driving and the remaining charges of Operating a Motor Vehicle with a Prohibited Alcohol Concentration-First Offense and Hit and Run were dismissed. JT was thrilled and hopefully learned a valuable lesson.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>Case # 5: OWI/PAC-First Offense with Accident and .248 Blood Test Amended to Ordinance That Does Not Show-up on Driving Record</b></div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
This was also a difficult case. A sheriff's deputy came upon DS' vehicle in the ditch at the intersection of two county highways. DS told the deputy that he swerved to miss another vehicle and DS was visibly impaired on the squad video in addition to the many observations of the deputies. Moreover, DS refused to do the field sobriety tests, instead telling the officers to just put the handcuffs on him. DS also made some statements to the effect that he was coming from a bar down the road. After arresting DS, he was taken for a blood test which returned a result of .248.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Despite all of this evidence, Attorney Murray seized upon the one thing that was never investigated: the <i>time </i>of driving. While DS made various statements that made it seem like he had just come from the bar, the timing of everything was never discussed and after filing motions and pushing the issue, the prosecutor agreed to amend the charge to "Disorderly Conduct with a Motor Vehicle," which is a local ordinance that does not appear on a person's driving record. DS could not be happier. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>Case # 6: OWI/PAC-First Offense Amended to Reckless Driving Ticket</b></div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
CW was pulled over for traveling 55 MPH in a 25 MPH zone and weaving in and out of the bike lane. Upon approaching the vehicle, the officer alleged CW had difficulty producing his driver's license and that he could not remember his address. Slurred speech was also alleged. CW also admitted to drinking three "Laughing Clown" 9.8% beers. Aside from the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus field sobriety test, CW did surprisingly well on the balancing field sobriety test, but did not do well on the alphabet test. The breath test could not be conducted because CW had GERD, so a blood draw was conducted hours after the arrest returning a result of .108. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Attorney Murray went to work. Viewing of the scene was very important in this case as the bike lane had been faded to the point that you could not see it at night, even with headlights on. Also, a simple review of the squad video showed that the officer was exaggerating the speed, although CW was probably speeding. Moreover, CW had a documented speech impediment and was dyslexic, providing an explanation for the slurred speech and the failed alphabet test. The biggest hurdle seemed to be the high blood test result and the fact that it was hours after the stop, making it difficult to argue that CW was below the legal limit at the time of driving. However, due to the higher alcohol percentage beer that CW was drinking, it was theoretically possible that he was below .08. Rather than go to trial, the prosecutor ultimately agreed to amend the charge to a Reckless Driving ticket. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>Case # 7: OWI/PAC-First Offense Amended to Absolute Sobriety Violation and Failure to Keep Vehicle Under Control tickets</b></div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
KE, who was under the age of 21 at the time, put his truck in the ditch when he swerved to miss a deer. He allegedly failed the field sobriety tests when officers arrived and provided a preliminary breath test of .101. The Intoximeter EC/IR II test came back at .09 g/210L.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The prosecutor was very stubborn in this case and we fought the charges for literally years. Never backing down, after several rounds of pretrial motions, the prosecutor finally agreed to come off the OWI/PAC charges. A very nice result for a very nice young man. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Melowski Lawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07235839250439747238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-368352738850935662018-06-06T14:40:00.002-07:002018-06-06T14:40:29.701-07:00Major Court of Appeals Victory for Dennis Melowski in an OWI-Homicide CaseShortly before his jury trial on several <i>very </i>serious traffic-related homicide charges, AG was denied his right to present a defense by a Walworth County trial court judge. AG filed an emergency petition to the court of appeals. On the Friday afternoon before his Monday jury trial, the court of appeals agreed to review the trial judge's decision, which Dennis Melowski believed was plainly erroneous. After litigating the matter for nearly 8 months in the court of appeals, the court of appeals issued its decision <i> summarily reversing </i>the trial judge's ruling. Summary reversals do not happen often in the court of appeals, typically only in situations where the trial judge was very obviously wrong. That was certainly the case here, as the the court of appeals decision was highly critical of the judge's ruling and his reasoning.<br />
<br />
A detailed press account of the appeal can be read here: <a href="http://www.gazettextra.com/news/crime/lawyers-argue-over-whether-elkhorn-man-can-say-anxiety-attack/article_78b7f362-bda4-5c41-83e0-b45cf3debd59.html">http://www.gazettextra.com/news/crime/lawyers-argue-over-whether-elkhorn-man-can-say-anxiety-attack/article_78b7f362-bda4-5c41-83e0-b45cf3debd59.html</a><br />
<br />
The court of appeals decision can be read here: <a href="https://www.wicourts.gov/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=211857">https://www.wicourts.gov/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=211857</a><br />
<br />
As we have said many times before, there is absolutely no substitute for superior lawyering.Melowski Lawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07235839250439747238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-65025522922750036742018-05-07T13:59:00.002-07:002018-05-08T09:50:32.692-07:00Another Motion Hearing Victory for Dennis Melowski Leads to Complete Dismissal of OWI-3rd/PAC-3rd Case (with .21 Breath Test Result)AW was called in by an anonymous caller who reported that she was "stumbling" as she got into her car and left a club she had been at. Officers in neighboring jurisdictions were told to be on the lookout for a vehicle matching the description the caller provided, including all but one digit of a license plate number. After observing what he believed was the suspected vehicle, an officer began following it. Since this was an "anonymous call," this officer knew that he would have to make independent observations of suspicious or unsafe driving to justify a traffic stop. After following AW's vehicle for several blocks, he noted that she was traveling approximately 20 MPH in a 30 MPH zone. Despite observing no other problems with her driving, the officer decided to stop AW for the traffic offense of Obstructing Traffic By Slow Speed. After further roadside investigation, AW was arrested for drunk driving, unfortunately for the third time. A breath test at the police department revealed an alcohol level of .21.<br />
<br />
Dennis Melowski knew that AW had a very good issue in her case the first time he spoke to her. Why? Because he knew that she had likely not committed the traffic violation for which she was stopped. You see, if an officer stops you for an improper or insufficient reason, it doesn't matter what he discovers about you after the fact. If the initial traffic stop is unlawful, all of the evidence the officer gathers after that gets thrown out, including the results of any field sobriety tests or the results of any breath or blood tests. In short, if Dennis could convince the judge that AW should not have been stopped in the first place, her case would end up being dismissed for lack of evidence.<br />
<br />
So Dennis carefully crafted his strategy to execute this plan. It started with questioning the officer at AW's DOT suspension hearing, during which Dennis got the officer to admit that despite traveling at a speed 10 MPH below the posted limit, AW's slow speed did not actually obstruct traffic because there was no other traffic present! Simply driving below the speed limit, even significantly so, is not in and of itself a traffic violation. Other traffic actually has to be obstructed by this slow speed for the offense to be committed. Moreover, AW was traveling on a four-lane road, further decreasing the risk of obstructing other vehicles. In light of the officer's testimony at the suspension hearing, Dennis filed a motion to suppress with the judge and a hearing was held. It was at this hearing that Dennis really did his damage to the State's case because the officer took the stand and severely contradicted his previous testimony at the DOT hearing, something that does not sit well with Dennis. Dennis pointed out each and every inconsistency in the officer's concocted testimony, so much so that the officer left the stand with zero credibility. More importantly, the judge saw through the officer's dubious testimony and quickly ruled in his favor. Based on the judge's ruling, ALL of the State's evidence against AW was thrown out and ALL charges against her were dismissed. It was the best possible result for AW and she is one EXTREMELY happy client.Melowski Lawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07235839250439747238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-2680194652257499042018-03-21T13:05:00.000-07:002018-03-21T13:05:36.351-07:00Back to Back Motion Hearing Victories for Dennis Melowski Result in Complete Dismissal of Two OWI-2nd Cases<h3>
Case #1: Complete Dismissal of OWI-2nd/PAC-2nd (with .142 Blood Test Result)</h3>
<div>
Dennis Melowski knew something wasn't right with this case the first time he read the police report. The officer who arrested SH had seen very few signs of impairment prior to having SH submit to a roadside preliminary breath test (PBT), the result of which was the only thing that led to SH being arrested for drunk driving, unfortunately for the second time. In Wisconsin, the law requires an officer to have "probable cause to believe" a person is impaired by alcohol in order to justify administering a PBT. Dennis believed that the officer simply didn't have grounds to give SH the PBT, given how well he had performed on the field sobriety tests. Dennis filed a motion with the judge asking for the PBT to be thrown out, along with all the other evidence the officer gathered after the PBT was illegally administered to his client, including the .142 blood test result. After a contested hearing in which Dennis had an opportunity to cross-examine the officer and expose all of the weaknesses of his investigation, the judge agreed with Dennis and threw out all of the evidence against SH. Given the judge's ruling, the district attorney's office had no choice but to dismiss all charges against SH. It was the best result he could have possibly hoped for.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Case #2: Complete Dismissal of OWI-2nd/PAC-2nd (with .154 Blood Test Result)</h3>
<div>
Dennis' victory at this particular motion hearing was extremely satisfying because it was the result of perhaps his most devastatingly effective cross-examination of an officer in his career. Dennis had filed a motion challenging the initial stop of DC's vehicle, along with a motion challenging the summoning of a K-9 unit to search DC's car for drugs. When Dennis questioned the arresting officer at the motion hearing, he was able to get him to admit to several untruths during his testimony. The officer became so concerned that Dennis would expose other areas of his very questionable testimony that he simply began to agree with everything Dennis needed to ensure his motions would be granted, which the judge did in very short order. It was one of the most surreal experiences of Dennis' career. After the judge granted Dennis' motions, the prosecutor immediately dismissed all charges against DC. He walked out of the courtroom completely exonerated! </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
By the way, as soon as we receive the transcript of Dennis' cross-examination from this hearing, we will be posting it right here, so be sure to check back in a few weeks. You won't believe what you will read. But you will see why this firm's courtroom excellence is without peer. </div>
Melowski Lawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07235839250439747238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-60927638956303276092018-03-01T15:07:00.000-08:002018-03-02T10:26:38.855-08:0012 More Clients Avoid Drunk Driving Convictions in Counties Around the StateWhen we say we handle cases all over Wisconsin, we mean it. In just the past few months, our statewide reputation for excellence has allowed our clients to avoid drunk driving convictions in all of the following counties : Winnebago, Waukesha, Eau Claire, Green Lake, Outagamie, Sheboygan, Racine and Vilas. Here are their outstanding results:<br />
<br />
<h3>
Case #1: Jury Finds Client NOT GUILTY in OWI-1st/PAC-1st Case</h3>
Our client was pulled over for for going 88 MPH in a 70 MPH zone; failed the FST's (at least according to the officer); and had a .09 blood test result. Through a withering cross-examination of the arresting officer, and an even more damaging cross-examination of the lab analyst (a supervisor, no less), Dennis damaged the credibility of the State's case so significantly that the jury had little difficulty returning NOT GUILTY verdicts for his client.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Case #2: OWI-3rd/PAC-3rd/Refusal of Chemical Test Reduced to Reckless Driving</h3>
<div>
This case is the perfect example of the lengths to which our firm will go to accomplish our clients' goals. SK came to us charged with her third drunk driving offense. By closely examining the court records from her second offense years earlier, Dennis found a way to successfully attack that prior conviction. By doing that, SK's first offense became too old to count, which meant Dennis was able to have the OWI-3rd reduced to just an OWI-1st. While most attorneys would be thrilled with such an outcome, Dennis kept fighting the case because he knew his client did not want to be convicted of drunk driving. Through months of continued litigation and negotiation, Dennis was able to get the prosecutor to reduce the OWI to a simple Reckless Driving ticket and SK avoided a drunk driving conviction altogether. If you are speaking with other attorneys about representation for your drunk driving case, please ask them to tell you about the last time they were able to achieve a result like this. And make them be specific.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Case #3: ALL Charges Dismissed in OWI-1st/RCS-1st/Possession of THC Case</h3>
<div>
KJ was facing several serious drug-related driving charges, as well as criminal charges for possession of marijuana and possession of drug paraphernalia. After going through the squad video evidence with a fine-tooth comb, Dennis Melowski discovered that KJ was subjected to an unconstitutional detention while a K-9 unit was summoned to the scene to search his vehicle. In short, at the time the K-9 unit was called, the officer who stopped KJ did not have probable cause to detain him for anything. Dennis filed a motion with the judge arguing this very point. After a contested hearing in which all of the officers involved testified, Dennis was able to convince the judge that he was right. The judge granted Dennis' motion and all of the evidence against KJ was thrown out. As a result, all of the charges were dismissed as if they never happened in the first place.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Case #4: Complete Dismissal of OWI-3rd/PAC-3rd Charges for CDL Client</h3>
This is another fantastic result for one of Dennis' many CDL clients. CG was charged with his third OWI. As he does in every case like this, Dennis closely examined whether there was any way to challenge one of CG's prior OWI convictions, which would substantially reduce the penalties CG was exposed to. After much leg work, Dennis found a significant problem with CG's second conviction from out of state. Dennis filed the appropriate motion and a hearing was held where the judge agreed with Dennis that CG's second offense should not be counted. This resulted in CG's first offense being too old to count. Thanks to Dennis' hard work, CG now found himself facing only an OWI-1st instead of an OWI-3rd. But because CG was a CDL holder, he had to avoid a drunk driving conviction altogether, even if it was just a first offense. After months of continued litigation, the judge dismissed the OWI-1st charges as well. NO DRUNK DRIVING CONVICTION. CG's job was saved and he is one of the most grateful clients we have ever had.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Case #5: OWI-1st/PAC-1st (with .142 Blood Test Result) Reduced to Two Minor Traffic Tickets for CDL Client</h3>
<div>
CL was referred to Dennis Melowski by a former sheriff's deputy Dennis had a jury trial with years ago. Cops have a very good sense for who the very best defense attorneys are because they have an opportunity to see their skill level first-hand in court. This particular retired deputy has referred several clients to Dennis over the years and Dennis has never disappointed. And CL's case was no different. Despite some very difficult facts, including a serious accident and a blood test well above the legal limit, Dennis was able to expose enough problems in the case to convince the District Attorney that a conviction on the original charges was in jeopardy. Dennis was able to negotiate a fantastic resolution: the OWI and PAC charges were dropped in exchange for CL pleading no contest to the minor traffic offenses of Inattentive Driving and Deviation from Designated Lane. CL never lost his license for even a single day and his CDL remained fully intact. He was VERY happy with this result.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Case #6: OWI-1st/Refusal of Chemical Test Reduced to Inattentive Driving for CDL Client</h3>
Yes, ANOTHER of our CDL clients avoided a drunk driving conviction in this case. BF had put his truck in the ditch on a snowy night. He walked to a nearby home for assistance and the police were promptly notified by the homeowner. BF failed the field sobriety tests and (allegedly) refused to submit to a breath test. Admittedly, not the greatest hand to be dealt in a drunk driving case. But after much negotiation with a prosecutor against whom Dennis has had much success over the years, an outstanding resolution was reached. The OWI and Refusal charges were dropped in exchange for a no contest plea to Inattentive Driving, a minor traffic offense. Another commercial driver's career saved.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Case #7: Complete Dismissal Of Refusal Charge in OWI-3rd Case</h3>
<div>
This is a follow-up to a previous entry on our Real Results Tracker from June of 2017. Last June, Dennis took CR's case to a jury trial in Waukesha County and won not guilty verdicts for charges of OWI-3rd/PAC-3rd and Operating with Restricted controlled Substance-3rd. It was a complete exoneration by the jury for CR. But there was still a charge of Refusal of Chemical Test that had to be decided by the judge. After extensive briefing, the judge ruled in CR's favor and dismissed the Refusal charge, the last charge remaining. Another complete exoneration for CR, who walked out of this case with literally no conviction for anything. It was a complete and utter victory across the board. As we have said repeatedly, if you are considering another firm for representation in your drunk driving case, ask them the last time they took a case like this to trial and won it. And also won the Refusal hearing. Make them be specific. Their dancing around the question will tell you all you need to know.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Case #8: OWI-1st/Refusal of Chemical Test Reduced to Reckless Driving</h3>
<div>
This was a case that Dennis was able to resolve so successfully because of the case he won this past summer in the Wisconsin Supreme Court. By crafting a creative legal argument based largely on that decision and extending it to the facts of BE's case, Dennis convinced the prosecutor that he would not be able to prevail at a refusal hearing, which would in turn significantly jeopardize his chances for conviction on the OWI charge as well. Rather than risk a complete loss, the prosecutor agreed to drop the OWI and Refusal charges in exchange for a no contest plea to Reckless Driving. BE paid a fine, but otherwise suffered no consequences. Most importantly, he avoided becoming a convicted drunk driver.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Case #9: OWI-1st/Refusal of Chemical Test Reduced to Operating Left of Center</h3>
<div>
Very few attorneys know the intricacies of Wisconsin's drunk driving laws as well as ours. Even fewer have the litigation skill necessary to leverage that knowledge into truly outstanding results for their clients. GH's case is a great example of the benefits of hiring a law firm that truly is at the very top of its field. GH came to Dennis with very difficult facts, especially as they related to his refusal of chemical test charge. However, by exploiting a mistake the officer made in the preparation and service of an important document, Dennis created a crack in the case that soon became a giant hole. Dennis was able to use this to negotiate a dismissal of the OWI and Refusal Charges in exchange for a no contest plea to Operating Left of Center, a very minor traffic offense. GH could not possibly be happier with this outcome.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Case #10: OWI-1st/PAC-1st (with .17 Breath Test Result) Reduced to Two Minor Traffic Offenses for Commercial Truck Driver</h3>
Persistence pays off. That is definitely the moral of CK's case. After litigating this case for more than 18 months, Dennis finally convinced the prosecutor to give his client, an over-the-road truck driver for a major trucking outfit, the deal of a lifetime. Although CK had a breath test result that was more than two times the legal limit, Dennis had significantly undermined the credibility of the arresting officer at a contested municipal court trial. After Dennis had the case transferred to circuit court, the prosecutor realized that the damage Dennis had done to the officer in municipal court was a serious threat to his case. As a result, he agreed to drop the drunk driving charges in exchange for pleas of no contest to two minor traffic offenses: Inattentive driving and Deviation from Lane. Aside from paying fines, CK suffered no consequences and his CDL remains fully intact. Another EXTREMELY satisfied client.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Case #11: OWI-1st/PAC-1st (with .11 Blood Test Result) Reduced to Reckless Driving</h3>
This fantastic result was achieved on the eve of MP's jury trial, in a county that is notoriously aggressive in pursuing drunk driving convictions. The prosecutor had already witnessed Dennis do significant damage to his case at a previous motion hearing and he feared the same thing would happen in front of the jury. Rather than risk losing, and embarrassing his officers, he gave Dennis what he wanted: no drunk driving charge. Needless to say, MP was thrilled.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Case #12: OWI-2nd/PAC-2nd (with .15 Blood Test Result) Reduced to Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle</h3>
If we told you the facts of this case you would not believe that this result was able to be achieved. Suffice it to say, they were very bad, particularly the video evidence. Nevertheless, Dennis was able to leverage an issue regarding the blood analysis into a truly remarkable result. Dennis' client avoided a drunk driving conviction and the case was resolved with a conviction for an offense that won't even appear on his driver record. A real result indeed. <br />
<br />
<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
Melowski Lawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07235839250439747238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-45204703926647320672017-10-27T10:00:00.001-07:002017-10-27T10:00:15.657-07:00Fantastic Results for Three of Attorney Murray's Clients<b>Case #1: Operating With Detectable Amount of Restricted Controlled Substance-Second Offense Completely Dismissed</b><br />
<br />
JR was pulled over for speeding around 9:30 PM on a Saturday while driving three friends home from a night out. She informed the officer that she was the designated driver and that she had not been drinking. The officer then had JR step out of the vehicle to blow a preliminary breath test (PBT). The first PBT did not register. The officer then questioned JR again if she was not drinking and now JR admitted that she had consumed alcohol. The PBT resulted in a "quick reading" that confirmed JR had been drinking. The officer then put JR through field sobriety tests, which she allegedly failed and another PBT was administered, which gave a result of .085 g/210L. JR was arrested for Operating While Intoxicated (OWI)-Second Offense and a blood test returned a result of .07 g/100mL.<br />
<br />
While prosecutors can choose to move forward on an OWI charge with a .07 result, it is much easier to work out an amendment to a lesser ticket in these situations. In spite of this, what many people do not realize is that if law enforcement does not like the result of the blood test, they can test your blood again for drugs, which is what happened in JR's case. The bigger problem is that any detectable amount of a restricted controlled substance is enough to prosecute someone as if it were an OWI. Unfortunately for JR, tetrahydrocannabinol or THC was found in her blood and the prosecution would not agree to amend the charge. On the other hand, JR hired Attorney Matthew Murray who successfully argued that the officer did not have the requisite reasonable suspicion or probable cause to extend the stop for the first PBT.<br />
<br />
The real key to this was getting the officer to admit at the motion hearing that he never observed any of the typical signs of intoxication from JR--i.e., bloodshot eyes, odor of intoxicants, slurred speech, etc. Knowing how to cross-examine an officer is essential for these types of cases. In fact, at the motion hearing, the officer stated that the only reason he gave JR a PBT was to confirm whether she was telling the truth about drinking. It would be an enormous encroachment on our Fourth Amendment rights to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures if an officer could simply administer a PBT to anyone to see if they were telling the truth about drinking. Case dismissed. Happy client.<br />
<br />
<b>Case #2: OWI/PAC-First Offense with .14 and Horrible Facts Amended to Reckless Driving.</b><br />
<b><br /></b>
KB was in a difficult position. A deputy found her asleep in the driver seat of her vehicle on the side of a county highway. The deputy had to knock several times and yell before KB awoke. The deputy alleged that there was a strong odor of intoxicants coming from KB and that her eyes were bloodshot and glassy. She told the deputy that as she was driving home she felt too drunk so she pulled over. The officer took KB's driver's license back to his car and when he returned, KB was vomiting inside her car and on herself. KB then allegedly failed the field sobriety tests and submitted to an Intoximeter test resulting in .14. Not good. <br />
<br />
However, after reviewing hours of recordings and ferreting through police reports, Attorney Murray observed in the video of the Intoximeter room that the deputy used hand sanitizer immediately before handling the mouthpiece where KB was to blow. In fact, the deputy used so much that he had to use a napkin to wipe up the excess sanitozer that landed on the desk. While Attorney Murray filed several motions, a challenge to the admissibility of the Intoximeter test result was the breaking point and an amendment to Reckless driving was given.<br />
<br />
Believe it or not, many attorneys do not bother getting the Intoximeter room recordings. KB sure is glad she hired an attorney who did.<br />
<br />
<b>Case #3: OWI-First Offense Amended to Inattentive Driving</b><br />
<b><br /></b>
AN was arrested and blew a .09 on a PBT at the scene. However, her blood test returned a result of .078. As noted above in JR's case, many prosecutors will still decide to move forward with these prosecutions and that could very well have happened here as AN had admitted to drinking, failed the standard field sobriety tests and also failed an alphabet test. This, however, would have been something we would have fought all the way. Knowing this, the prosecutor offered to amend the matter to a citation for Reckless Driving. This was rejected by the defense and the case ultimately settled with the lesser citation for Inattentive Driving. Another great result.Melowski Lawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07235839250439747238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-15755343930831743432017-09-21T11:59:00.000-07:002017-09-21T11:59:08.744-07:00Third Offense with mandatory 45 days jail dropped to First Offense with no jailTH's first two offenses were in 1993 and 1995. Unfortunately, after 22 years of being a model citizen, she was recently arrested for a third offense and was now facing between 45 days and 1-year jail and all the other enhanced penalties that come along with a third offense.<br />
<br />
After pouring over the discovery, Attorney Murray was able to find an attack on TH's 1995 offense. TH offered to plead to a first offense if the prosecution would concede the argument but the District Attorney's Office refused.<br />
<br />
*A second offense committed more than 10 years after the first offense is considered another first offense. Any offense committed thereafter, even 50 years down the road, is considered a third offense.<br />
<br />
Attorney Murray then filed the challenge to the 1995 conviction along with three other motions challenging the arrest, the administration of the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus test and the Informing the Accused form used to ask individuals to submit to a blood draw. The morning of the motion hearing the prosecutor finally agreed to Attorney Murray's initial proposition. TH was so happy she hugged Attorney Murray and told him she was so happy she could kiss him. We are pretty happy too. This was another great result.Melowski Lawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07235839250439747238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-36659848922025178742017-09-11T15:28:00.000-07:002017-09-12T08:23:58.191-07:008 More Clients Avoid Drunk Driving Convictions in Cases Ranging from OWI-1st to OWI-3rd<h3>
Case #1: OWI-3rd/PAC-3rd (with .186 blood test result) Reduced to Non-Traffic Misdemeanor</h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">This was a case Dennis Melowski litigated for 3 years because his client, GL, had a very good job as a sales rep that absolutely required a valid driver's license. Had GL been convicted of the original OWI-3rd charge, he would have lost his job immediately. Not only that, he would have been facing a several-month jail sentence; a 3-year license revocation; thousands of dollars in fines; and potentially years of IID-installation. All of this was avoided when, about a week before the scheduled jury trial, Dennis finally convinced the prosecutor to drop the drunk driving charges in exchange for a no contest plea to a reduced charge of Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle, which is a non-alcohol-related, non-traffic misdemeanor that would not even appear on GL's driver record. Aside from being placed on probation for one year and paying a fine, GL suffered no consequences. He never lost his license for even a single day and spent no time in jail. Most importantly, his career was saved. GL was enormously happy with this fantastic outcome, so much so that he posted the following 5-star review of Dennis' work on the independent lawyer-rating website AVVO: </span></div>
<div class="row u-vertical-margin-0" style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 16px; margin: 0rem -1.2rem;">
<div class="col-xs-12 col-md-9 pull-right" style="box-sizing: border-box; float: right; min-height: 1px; padding-left: 1.2rem; padding-right: 1.2rem; position: relative; width: 658.125px;">
<h3 class="u-vertical-margin-0" itemprop="headline" style="background-color: #f9f9f9; box-sizing: border-box; color: inherit; font-size: 1em; line-height: 1.5; margin-bottom: 0rem; margin-top: 0rem;">
</h3>
<h3 class="u-vertical-margin-0" itemprop="headline" style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 1em; line-height: 1.5; margin-bottom: 0rem; margin-top: 0rem;">
<span style="background-color: black; color: white;"><br /></span></h3>
<h3 class="u-vertical-margin-0" itemprop="headline" style="box-sizing: border-box; font-family: "proxima nova", "avenir next", avenir, "century gothic", "helvetica neue", arial, sans-serif; font-size: 1em; line-height: 1.5; margin-bottom: 0rem; margin-top: 0rem;">
<span style="background-color: black; color: white;">
Professional and Amazing: 5.0 stars</span></h3>
</div>
</div>
<div class="row" style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 16px; margin-left: -1.2rem; margin-right: -1.2rem;">
<span style="background-color: black; color: white;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div class="col-xs-12 col-md-9" style="box-sizing: border-box; float: left; min-height: 1px; padding-left: 1.2rem; padding-right: 1.2rem; position: relative; width: 658.125px;">
<div aria-expanded="true" class="" data-truncate-label="Less <span aria-hidden="true" class="icon fa fa-chevron-up"></span>" data-truncate-lines="5" id="js-truncated-review-1460379" itemprop="reviewBody" style="box-sizing: border-box;">
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; font-family: "Proxima Nova", "Avenir Next", Avenir, "Century Gothic", "Helvetica Neue", Arial, sans-serif; margin-bottom: 0.75em;">
<span style="background-color: black; color: white;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; font-family: "Proxima Nova", "Avenir Next", Avenir, "Century Gothic", "Helvetica Neue", Arial, sans-serif; margin-bottom: 0.75em;">
<span style="background-color: black; color: white;">If you are reading this and your are looking for the best, look no further. I was facing a 3rd OWI and I contacted Dennis Melowski and I can tell you that you wont find a more professional or understanding lawyer. I also can tell you first hand that Dennis will not give up even when it gets tough. There wasn't a time that my questions or phone call weren't answered. After almost 3 years Dennis was able to get me a AWSOME result, nothing on my driving record, minor fine. </span></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; font-family: "Proxima Nova", "Avenir Next", Avenir, "Century Gothic", "Helvetica Neue", Arial, sans-serif; margin-bottom: 0.75em;">
<span style="background-color: black; color: white;">Thank you Dennis Melowski for my life back!!!!</span></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; font-family: "Proxima Nova", "Avenir Next", Avenir, "Century Gothic", "Helvetica Neue", Arial, sans-serif; margin-bottom: 0.75em;">
<span style="background-color: black; color: white;"><br /></span></div>
<h3 style="box-sizing: border-box; font-family: "Proxima Nova", "Avenir Next", Avenir, "Century Gothic", "Helvetica Neue", Arial, sans-serif; margin-bottom: 0.75em;">
<span style="background-color: black; color: white;">
Case #2: OWI-1st/PAC-1st Reduced to Minor Traffic Ticket; CDL Client's Career is Saved</span></h3>
<div>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;">MP has been an over-the-road truck driver for years. It's a lucrative business, but one that obviously requires a valid CDL. Had MP been convicted of the OWI or PAC charges he was facing, he literally would have lost everything. Fortunately for MP, he was referred to Dennis Melowski by a former client (also a CDL holder) whose career Dennis had saved. And Dennis did the same for MP. After extensive litigation at the municipal court level, Dennis was able to expose several significant holes in the prosecutor's case against MP, holes that ultimately allowed for an incredible result. MP was able to enter no contest pleas to a minor traffic ticket and a minor municipal ordinance violation which would not even appear on MP's driver record. Aside from paying fines, MP suffered no consequences. He never lost his license and his CDL remains fully intact. MP is a <i>very</i> satisfied client.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<h3>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;">Case #3: Another Fantastic Result for a CDL Client: OWI-1st/PAC-1st (with .11 breath test result) Reduced to Reckless Driving </span></h3>
<div>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;">JS was another over-the-road truck driver who resided in another state on the east coast. His routes took him all over the country. Like MP, JS was facing the end of his successful trucking business if he was convicted of the drunk driving charges he was facing. But Dennis Melowski made sure that didn't happen. Despite some difficult facts, Dennis was able to negotiate an outstanding resolution for JS that resulted in the OWI and PAC charges being dropped in exchange for a plea to a reduced charge of Reckless Driving. This resulted in no license loss for JS and absolutely no impact on his CDL. Thanks to Dennis, his business is still thriving.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<h3>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;">Case #4: Complete Dismissal of OWI-1st/Restricted Controlled Substances; Posession of THC and Posession of Paraphernalia Charges </span></h3>
<div>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;">KJ was stopped for speeding. After making some initial observations, the officer summoned a K-9 unit to the scene for a drug search of KJ's vehicle. Marijuana and drug paraphernalia were ultimately found and, after allegedly failing some field sobriety tests, KJ was arrested for not only the drug charges, but for Operating While Impaired by a restricted controlled substance (marijuana). After careful review of the video evidence, and after thorough questioning of the officers at a DOT hearing, Dennis Melowski discovered significant problems with the officers' handling of the roadside encounter. Dennis filed a number of legal challenges and, following several contested hearings, the judge ultimately ruled in Dennis' favor. Just as Dennis had argued, the judge determined that the officers did not have a sufficient basis to justify the K-9 search of KJ's vehicle, which meant the search was illegal and any fruits of that search (the drugs, the paraphernalia, the field sobriety tests and even the blood test that showed THC in KJ's system) were all thrown out. Because the prosecutor was literally left with no evidence in the case, ALL charges against KJ were dismissed. It was the best possible outcome for KJ. And he could not possibly be any happier.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<h3>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white;">
Case #5: OWI-1st/Refusal of Chemical Test Resolved with Non-Traffic Misdemeanor for CDL/Power Lineman Client</span></h3>
<div>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white;">Dennis Melowski has saved the careers of countless power linemen over the years. A dangerous but very well-paying career, most power line work requires a valid CDL. A drunk driving conviction (with its mandatory CDL disqualification) is typically a professional death senetnce in this line of work. That was the bleak prospect our client, AS, was facing when he was arrested and chrged with his first OWI, along with the equally problematic charge of refusing the subsequent blood test. A conviction on either of these charges would have meant the end of AS's budding career as a power lineman. But that never happened thanks to the hard work and shrewd lawyering of Dennis Melowski. After raising a number of legal challenges on AS's behalf, even the prosecutor assigned to the case was forced to concede that there were significant problems with how the arresting officer handled the investigation in AS's case. In the end, both the OWI and Refusal charges were dropped in exchange for a plea of no contest to a non-alcohol-related, non-traffic misdemeanor offense that would not even appear on AS's record. It was a fantastic result and one that accomplished AS's goal of saving his career.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white;"><br /></span></div>
<h3>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white;">
Case #6: Yet Another CDL Victory: OWI-1st/PAC-1st (with .17 breath test result) Reduced to Two Minor Traffic Tickets</span></h3>
<div>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white;">RZ owns and operates a successful excavating business that requires a valid CDL. A conviction on the charges he was facing would have ended that. Not only would his CDL have been disqualified, he would not be able to afford the exhorbitant insurance rates for all of the vehicles and equipment he owned that were essential to his business. In short, the stakes couldn't have been higher, which is the reason he hired Dennis Melowski to represent him after being referred by several others whom Dennis had helped over the years. And Dennis delivered in a big way for RZ. After a devastating cross-examination of the arresting officer at a pretrial motion hearing, the prosecutor knew her case would be in grave jeopardy if it went to trial. Rather than risking a complete loss, the prosecutor agreed to a resolution involving just two minor traffic tickets. RZ's CDL was spared and his business continues to thrive.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white;"><br /></span></div>
<h3>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white;">
Case #7: OWI-1st/Refusal of Chemical Test Reduced to Two Minor Traffic Tickets</span></h3>
<div>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white;">Talk about a lot at stake. Dennis Melowski's client, RW, has a great job with a large multi-national company that requires him to travel to Canada on a regular basis. It is very dificult to travel to Canada with a drunk driving conviction on one's record, since such an offense is considered a felony there. Any disruption in RW's ability to go to Canada would have resulted in his termination from a high-paid position. He had no choice but to fight his charges and he selected Dennis Melowski for the task. It was the best decision RW could have made. After discovering an issue that most lawyers would likely have missed, Dennis was able to leverage a fantastic result for RW. The drunk driving and Refusal charges were dropped. In exchange, RW entered no contest pleas to the minor traffic offenses of Inattentive Driving and Improper Parking Off Roadway. Aside from paying fines, RW suffered no consequences. He still has his job...and a trmendous amount of gratitude. Hiring the best almost always pays off.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white;"><br /></span></div>
<h3>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white;">
Case #8: OWI-2nd/PAC-2nd (with .175 blood test) Reduced to Non-Traffic Misdemeanor</span></h3>
<div>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: black; color: white;">Dennis Melowski isn't even sure how he got the prosecutor to agree to the resolution in this case. It involved some <i>very </i>difficult facts. Dennis' client, NS, was found passed out behind the wheel of his vehicle in the middle of a county highway...across the centerline. He performed poorly on the field sobriety tests and had a blood test result more than double the legal limit. But after pushing the case to the brink of trial, Dennis was able to achieve a remarkable result. NS pled no contest to a reduced charge of Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle, an offense that does not involve any license revocation and will not even appear on NS's driver record. Sometimes the best lawyers get results simply because of their reputation for winning. Case in point. </span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
Melowski Lawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07235839250439747238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-67108241816030992442017-08-08T10:44:00.001-07:002017-08-08T11:09:12.050-07:00Landmark Win in the Wisconsin Supreme Court for Dennis Melowski: State's High Court Tosses a Blood Test Result in a Felony OWI-Injury Case Due to Coerced Consent**In a landmark decision that will have a statewide impact on drunk driving prosecutions, Dennis Melowski was able to successfully convince the Wiscosnin Supreme Court that his client's .10 blood test result should be thrown out in a prosecution for a serious felony OWI-Injury case. Dennis argued that the form read to his client seeking his consent to a blood test was misleading and unlawfully coercive. The "Informing the Accused" form is one that is used by all law enforcement agencies across the state of Wisconsin. It is read any time an officer wants a suspected impaired driver to consent to a breath or blood test following an arrest, which is virtually every case. This form, however, significantly misstates the consequences a person is facing for refusing such a test when they have been involved in an accident where there has been a serious injury or death. Essentially, the form threatens the accused driver with penalties that could not lawfully be enforced. Because the penalties that were threatened to Dennis' client could not be enforced in his situation, the High Court agreed with Dennis that his client's consent to the blood draw was coerced and not voluntary. If consent to a search (in this case a blood test) is not the product of voluntary consent, the fruits of the search (the alcohol level) have to be thrown out. Dennis' victory is being hailed as the most significant ruling by the Wisconsin Supreme Court in the field of DUI defense in 20 years.<br />
<br />
The Supreme Court's full decision can be read here: <a href="https://www.wicourts.gov/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=192464">https://www.wicourts.gov/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=192464</a><br />
<br />
Media accounts of the decision can be read here: <a href="http://www.fdlreporter.com/story/news/2017/07/07/high-court-finds-former-fond-du-lac-mans-blood-draw-unconstitutional/460226001/">http://www.fdlreporter.com/story/news/2017/07/07/high-court-finds-former-fond-du-lac-mans-blood-draw-unconstitutional/460226001/</a><br />
<br />
**This was Dennis Melowski's fourth time arguing a case before the Wisconsin Supreme Court and his third victory.Melowski Lawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07235839250439747238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-10539457735551007732017-06-21T12:29:00.001-07:002017-09-21T10:57:59.841-07:00Back-to-Back Jury Wins for Dennis Melowski<h3>
June 15, 2017: Client found Not Guilty of OWI-2nd/PAC-2nd (with .232 blood test result)</h3>
<div>
<br />
JS's job was literally on the line in this case. Had the jury found him guilty, he would have been fired the very next day from his lucrative job with an energy company, a job that required him to have a valid CDL at all times. Despite being stopped for crossing the centerline, failing the field sobriety tests on camera and having a blood test result nearly three times the legal limit, Dennis Melowski was able to dismantle the State's case against his client through devastating cross-examinations of both the arresting officer and the blood analyst from the State Lab. Dennis was able to expose several exaggerations and inconsistencies in the officer's recounting of events, but the real damage was done to the blood evidence. Dennis was able to get the State's expert to admit to numerous failures of the machine used to test JS's blood sample, in addition to exposing a major failure in protocol the very morning JS's sample was tested. By the time Dennis was done, the jury had no confidence whatsoever in the State's blood evidence and they found JS NotGuilty of both the OWI and PAC charges. He walked out of the courthouse completely exonerated. He's also probably one of the happiest clients we've ever had.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
June 20, 2017: Waukesha County Jury Finds Client Not Guilty of OWI-3rd, PAC-3rd, and Operating with a Restricted Controlled Substance (with .099 blood test and THC) </h3>
<div>
<br />
Waukesha County juries are known for being conservative, so Dennis Melowski's plan of essentially calling three police officers liars as the cornerstone of his defense in CR's case was definitely a risky one. But given most of the overwhelmingly bad evidence in the case, Dennis had little choice. CR's performance on the field sobriety tests was quite poor...and captured on video. Even more damning was the fact that CR's blood had both an alcohol level above the legal limit and the presence of THC (marijuana). Add to that the fact that CR was very uncooperative after his arrest, and was even accused of urinating in the back of the squad car en route to the hospital. However, this was a case where CR was found passed out behind the wheel and the State's ability to prove its case hinged on whether or not they could prove the vehicle was running at the time the officers arrived on scene. You see, in Wisconsin, the vehicle does not have to be in motion for a person to be charged with an OWI-related offense. All the State has to prove is that the vehicle was running and that is enough to constitute vehicle "operation" under Wisconsin's tough drunk driving laws. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
All three cops who were on scene that night took the witness stand and swore under oath that CR's vehicle was running when they found him. In fact, they were quite adamant. But CR insisted that the keys were in his pocket the whole time. Dennis had no doubt his client was telling the truth, but could he possibly convince twelve citizens of Waukesha County that the cops were lying? As each cop testified, Dennis systematically destroyed them. Outright lies were exposed in two of the officers' reports, lies that the other officers repeated in their own testimony, unaware that Dennis had already gotten the officers to admit the "mistakes" (their word, not Dennis') they had made. This is why it's so important for witnesses to be "sequestered" during a trial, so they can't watch another witness testify and conform their own testimony as needed. So each cop took the stand, not knowing what the cop who testified before them was forced to admit under Dennis' withering cross-examination. When the next cop took the stand, he would stick to a story that had already been conclusively debunked. Even more problems with the officers' "version" were exposed as Dennis used their own video evidence against them. Dennis managed to make eye contact with several jurors who were literally shaking their heads in disbelief at the cops' manufactured testimony. Dennis had such complete faith that the cops' credibility had been completely destroyed that he decided not to call any witnesses himself, not even his own client. Just thirty minutes into their deliberation, the jury reached a unanimous verdict that CR was NOT GUILTY of all charges. CR's family, who were all in attendance, wept for joy as the verdicts were read. And CR? He was completely vindicated.<br />
<br />
Here is the 5-star review that CR posted on the independent lawyer rating website Avvo regarding Dennis' work on his case:<br />
<br />
<div class="row u-vertical-margin-0" style="background-color: #f9f9f9; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: "proxima nova", "avenir next", avenir, "century gothic", "helvetica neue", arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; margin: 0rem -1.2rem;">
<div class="col-xs-12 col-md-9 pull-right" style="box-sizing: border-box; float: left; min-height: 1px; padding-left: 1.2rem; padding-right: 1.2rem; position: relative; width: 658.125px;">
<h3 class="u-vertical-margin-0" itemprop="headline" style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 1em; line-height: 1.5; margin-bottom: 0rem; margin-top: 0rem;">
<span style="color: white;">
My case went to trial and Dennis was THERE.</span></h3>
<div>
<span style="color: white;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="color: white;">VERDICT: NOT GUILTY!!! Dennis has a lot of passion for what he does. I trusted him to get the job done and he did more than that. I have never been in a trial before but when the time came I am so glad that Dennis was there to represent me. He was so organized and had a passion for me and my case. In my opinion a good foundation for a lawyer is when you can find somebody that has a passion for what they do and they honestly believe in you. I will always be impressed by how Dennis carried himself in the courtroom during my trial, he is a leader, not a follower. If you want to WIN you will choose Dennis as your person to represent you! Thank you so many times Dennis!</span></div>
</div>
<div class="col-xs-12 col-md-3" style="box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; float: left; min-height: 1px; padding-left: 1.2rem; padding-right: 1.2rem; position: relative; width: 219.375px;">
<div class="h2 u-vertical-margin-0 u-text-color-coral" style="box-sizing: border-box; color: rgb(242, 119, 96) !important; font-size: 1.25em; font-weight: 700; line-height: 1.4; margin-bottom: 0rem !important; margin-top: 0rem !important;">
<div itemprop="reviewRating" itemscope="" itemtype="http://schema.org/Rating" style="box-sizing: border-box;">
<span class="text-nowrap" style="box-sizing: border-box; white-space: nowrap;"><span aria-hidden="true" class="icon icon-star u-text-color-yellow" style="box-sizing: border-box; color: rgb(252 , 152 , 53); display: inline; font-family: "avvo ui icons"; font-weight: normal; line-height: 1; position: relative; top: 0.1em;"></span><span aria-hidden="true" class="icon icon-star u-text-color-yellow" style="box-sizing: border-box; color: rgb(252 , 152 , 53); display: inline; font-family: "avvo ui icons"; font-weight: normal; line-height: 1; position: relative; top: 0.1em;"></span><span aria-hidden="true" class="icon icon-star u-text-color-yellow" style="box-sizing: border-box; color: rgb(252 , 152 , 53); display: inline; font-family: "avvo ui icons"; font-weight: normal; line-height: 1; position: relative; top: 0.1em;"></span><span aria-hidden="true" class="icon icon-star u-text-color-yellow" style="box-sizing: border-box; color: rgb(252 , 152 , 53); display: inline; font-family: "avvo ui icons"; font-weight: normal; line-height: 1; position: relative; top: 0.1em;"></span><span aria-hidden="true" class="icon icon-star u-text-color-yellow" style="box-sizing: border-box; color: rgb(252 , 152 , 53); display: inline; font-family: "avvo ui icons"; font-weight: normal; line-height: 1; position: relative; top: 0.1em;"></span><span class="sr-only" style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; clip: rect(0px 0px 0px 0px); height: 1px; margin: -1px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; position: absolute; width: 1px;">5.0 stars</span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="row" style="background-color: #f9f9f9; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; font-family: "Proxima Nova", "Avenir Next", Avenir, "Century Gothic", "Helvetica Neue", Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; margin-left: -1.2rem; margin-right: -1.2rem;">
</div>
<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Melowski Lawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07235839250439747238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-6258503866185465172017-05-18T09:49:00.000-07:002017-05-18T14:09:46.976-07:004 of Attorney Murray's Clients Avoid Drunk Driving Convictions<h2>
<b>Case # 1: OWI/PAC - 1st (with .138 blood test) Reduced To Reckless Driving</b></h2>
<br />
RS was coming home from a wedding in an unfamiliar area. He was radared traveling 40 MPH in a 25 MPH zone, pulled over and put through field sobriety tests after the officer alleged glossy eyes, the odor of intoxicants and that RS nearly dropped his insurance paperwork out of the window when providing it to the officer.<br />
<br />
The officer alleged that he observed all the clues on the HGN test, 3 of 8 clues on the Walk and Turn test, and 2 of 8 clues on the One Leg Stand test. RS also was unable to recite the alphabet as instructed by the officer. A preliminary breath test returned a result of 0.123. A blood test returned a result of 0.138.<br />
<br />
Attorney Murray filed a motion asserting that the officer failed to provide the proper administrative suspension paperwork based upon the officer putting "no" in the paperwork that asks if a certain form was provided. The prosecutor responded that such paperwork is automatically populated by a computer and that the officer was prepared to testify that he indeed did provide the paperwork to RS. However, anticipating this at the beginning of the case, Attorney Murray specifically asked this question at the administrative suspension hearing and the officer indicated he did complete this particular section of the form manually.<br />
<br />
Ultimately, the day before the motion hearing and jury trial, the prosecutor agreed to amend the charge. RS could not be happier as a drunk driving conviction would have made it difficult or impossible for him to visit his in-laws in another country. RS can now rest assured that he can leave the country with his wife to see family. He was so happy that he posted the 5-star review of Matt's work titled "Won my case" on the independent lawyer rating website Avvo: <a href="https://www.avvo.com/attorneys/53081-wi-matthew-murray-1798857.htm#client_reviews">https://www.avvo.com/attorneys/53081-wi-matthew-murray-1798857.htm#client_reviews</a>.<br />
<br />
<h2>
<b>Case # 2: OWI/PAC - 1st (with .18 Breath Test) Reduced Reckless Driving</b></h2>
<br />
DG was pulled over at 11:28 PM for traveling 41 MPH in a 35 MPH zone and for traveling over the fog line. She handed the officer her credit card when asked for her driver's license and the officer noticed the odor of intoxicants, red/glassy eyes, and slurred speech. DG denied drinking but was nevertheless asked to perform field sobriety tests, which she allegedly failed. A preliminary breath test returned a result of 0.19 and the evidentiary breath test at the police station return a result of 0.18. This occurred in 2014.<br />
<br />
Occasionally, cases are lost or forgotten about by the prosecutor and that is what happened here. Attorney Murray laid low knowing full well that the longer the case remains pending, the stronger the case for a motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute. Years later, the court discovered what was happening and scheduled a hearing. Attorney Murray was then able to work out an amendment to a Reckless Driving ticket.<br />
<br />
<h2>
<b>Case # 3: OWI/PAC - 1st (with .211 Blood Test) Reduced to Reckless Driving</b></h2>
<br />
Officers were dispatched to a report of a red four-door car parked on railroad tracks. Upon arrival, there was no vehicle on the railroad tracks, but there was a red four-door car parked in a nearby parking lot. The officer pulled into the parking lot and the vehicle began to drive away. The officer then conducted a traffic stop, which ultimately led to LW being arrested for Operating While Intoxicated - 1st Offense. Attorney Murray was able to convince the prosecutor that the basis for the stop was insufficient and the parties agreed to resolve the case with a Reckless Driving ticket.<br />
<br />
<h2>
<b>Case # 4: OWI/PAC - 1st (with .135 Blood Test) Amended to Non-Traffic Offense for CDL Client</b></h2>
<b><br /></b>
FG had a difficult case. He was called in by a store owner stating that FG was driving on his lawn and doing doughnuts in the middle of the road. Police were dispatched and found FD stopped at a traffic light. FG had his foot on and off the brake at the light tot he point where his vehicle was visibly jerking. FG then cut the officer off going from the far right lane to the left turning lane. To make matters worse, FG had a bottle of liquor in the car and failed the field sobriety tests according to the officer. A blood draw was performed and the test returned a result of 0.135. Unfortunately, FG was also a commercial driver and a conviction on either the OWI or PAC charge meant that FG would lose his career.<br />
<br />
Attorney Murray filed several motions challenging the initial detention, administration of the field sobriety tests, and the arrest. By watching the officer's body camera, Attorney Murray also discovered that FG's blood test was performed in the garage of the hospital because all of the emergency rooms were occupied. To make matters worse, everything was done beside a dirty garbage can with much of the equipment being placed on the lid of the garbage can! Based upon this discovery, Attorney Murray challenged the blood test. Prior to the motion hearing, the prosecutor agreed to dismiss the OWI and PAC charges and have the non-alcohol related charge of Negligent Operation issued which does not show up on an individual's driving record. Career saved.<br />
<br />
*Since joining Melowski and Associates in September of 2012, Attorney Murray has obtained 33 amendments or dismissals in drunk driving cases among many other fantastic results.Melowski Lawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07235839250439747238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-43061651164536887872017-03-01T14:25:00.000-08:002017-03-01T14:37:33.689-08:00Another Melowski & Associates OWI-Homicide Client Avoids Prison: Pleads to Reduced Charge and Sentenced to One Year in the County Jail with Full Work-Release PrivilegesSix of Dennis Melowski's last eight OWI-Homicide* clients have avoided prison and been sentenced to county jail time with work-release. This is a record of success in these difficult cases that simply can't be matched by any other attorney in Wisconsin. And Dennis' work in this particular case demonstrates the lengths to which his firm will go to achieve the best possible result for their clients. After taking over the case from a local attorney, Dennis discovered some shocking legal improprieties by the police, judge and prosecutor, the exposure of which ultimately resulted in the latter two individuals being removed from the case. Given the gravity of the issues Dennis unearthed, the Wisconsin Attorney General's Office took over the prosecution and a judge from a county 2.5 hours away was assigned. After months and months of legal wrangling and negotiations, a remarkable plea agreement was reached in which the original charges of OWI-Homicide and PAC-Homicide were dismissed. In exchange, Dennis' client entered a no contest plea to a reduced charge of Negligent Homicide, with the Attorney General's Office agreeing to a sentence of just 12 months in the local jail with full work-release privileges, meaning Dennis' client would be released 12 hours per day for his job. The reduced charge also carried only a 1-year license revocation as opposed to the mandatory 5-year revocation that the original charges entailed. In her statements to the judge at the sentencing hearing, the assistant attorney general remarked that she could not recall her office ever agreeing to such a low sentence in a case like this, but that her hand was essentially forced by the legal issues Dennis brought to light. In fact, the proposed sentence was so atypical that it had to be approved by the attorney general himself before she could proceed with the agreement. In the end, the judge followed the plea agreement to the letter and Dennis' client walked out of the courtroom (he also got two weeks to report) a VERY happy man. The local newspaper account of the outcome in the case can be read here: <a href="http://www.yourdailyglobe.com/story/2017/03/01/news/kimball-drunk-driving-fatality-case-draws-year-in-jail-stiff-costs/8059.html">http://www.yourdailyglobe.com/story/2017/03/01/news/kimball-drunk-driving-fatality-case-draws-year-in-jail-stiff-costs/8059.html</a><br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
*An OWI-Homicide carries a maximum penalty of 40 years imprisonment and a $100,000.00 fine. </div>
Melowski Law Real Results Trackerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14139407287298455722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-54203973679618053812017-02-07T12:03:00.000-08:002017-02-07T12:03:06.554-08:0010 Weeks, 10 Clients Avoid Drunk Driving Convictions: Check Out the Truly Amazing Results We have Obtained for our Clients in just the last 2+ Months<h3>
Case #1: OWI-1st/PAC-1st (with .196 Blood Test Result) Reduced to Reckless Driving</h3>
<div>
AB came to us with a very difficult set of facts. He was found by the police passed out behind the wheel of a running vehicle parked in a lane of travel and performed poorly on the field sobriety tests, on camera. Despite the bleak outlook, AB had to fight his case because his job required driving a company vehicle and having fully valid privileges at all times. Through exhaustive questioning at AB's administrative suspension hearing, and intimate knowledge of proper police procedure, Dennis Melowski was able to lay the groundwork for two legal challenges in the case. Dennis was able to use these challenges as leverage to negotiate a fantastic result in AB's case. Just moments before AB's motion hearing was set to begin, Dennis convinced the prosecutor to reduce the OWI charge to Reckless Driving and to dismiss the remaining PAC charge. AB avoided any loss of license; avoided the mandatory IID installation; and, most importantly, avoided any type of alcohol-related conviction. Aside from paying a fine, AB suffered no consequences and still has his job.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Case #2: Complete Dismissal of OWI-2nd/PAC-2nd Charges (with .14 Blood Test Result)</h3>
<div>
AW was another client whose job depended on avoiding a drunk driving conviction and Dennis Melowski delivered in a major way. In a very difficult county, with an even more difficult prosecutor, Dennis was able to to successfully convince the judge that the arresting officer did not have proper grounds to have AW exit his vehicle to submit to field sobriety tests in the first place. As a result of the judge's ruling, all of the the evidence in AW's case, including the .14 blood test result, was thrown out and both the OWI and PAC charges were completely dismissed. It was the best possible outcome for AW because it is as if the charges were never issued. An amazing result...and an EXTREMELY happy client.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Case #3: Complete Dismissal of OWI-3rd/PAC-3rd Charges (with .23 Blood Test Result) </h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
JJ was yet another client who had to avoid a drunk driving conviction to save his job. And he, too, had a very challenging set of facts. Stopped for going more than 25mph over the speed limit and crossing the centerline, these were not even the worst facts Dennis Melowski had to contend wit. There was also a very damaging squad video and a blood test result that was nearly 3 times the legal limit. Despite what seemed to be far too many hurdles to overcome, Dennis was able to successfully convince the judge that JJ was unlawfully arrested...and he used the officer's own squad video to do it. Dennis was able to show the judge that JJ was, in fact, placed under arrest <i>before</i> the field sobriety tests were even conducted. As a result of the judge's ruling agreeing with Dennis, ALL of the evidence in JJ's case was thrown out and all charges were dismissed. Like the incident never happened in the first place. JJ was actually moved to tears at this outcome. Another VERY satisfied client.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Case #4: OWI-1st/PAC-1st (with .16 Breath Test Result) Reduced to Inattentive Driving and a Non-Traffic City Ordinance Violation</h3>
<div>
You may be sensing a theme. Most of our clients hire us because of very serious employment or professional concerns. And DD is yet another example. Having both a job that required a company vehicle and being a member of the Army Reserves, DD was highly motivated to fight his case for multiple reasons. And despite having a breath test result that was twice the legal limit, Dennis Melowski was able to negotiate an extremely favorable outcome. Due to some creative legal challenges Dennis was able to develop, he was ultimately able to convince the prosecutor to drop the original OWI and PAC charges in exchange for DD pleading no contest to the minor traffic offense of Inattentive Driving and a non-traffic local city ordinance that wouldn't even appear on DD's driver record. Aside from paying some fines, DD would suffer no consequences. He completely avoided a drunk driving conviction; mandatory IID installation; and mandatory license revocation. If you ask DD, he will tell you that hiring Melowski & Associates was one of the best decisions he has ever made.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Case #5: OWI-1st/Refusal of Chemical Test Reduced to Reckless Driving in Walworth County</h3>
<div>
Despite KS's arrest occurring in a notoriously tough county, Dennis Melowski was able to negotiate an outstanding resolution of his case based on a significant procedural error made by the officer that Dennis was able to uncover that threatened the ability of the prosecutor to proceed with the Refusal charge. Dennis leveraged this into a reduction of the OWI charge to the non-alcohol-related offense of Reckless Driving and a complete dismissal of the Refusal charge. Aside from paying a fine, KS suffered no consequences and never lost his license for a single day. Needless to say, he was thrilled with this outstanding result.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Case #6: OWI-2nd/PAC-2nd (with .085 Blood Test Result) Amended to Reckless Driving and a Misdemeanor Offense of Obstructing an Officer</h3>
<div>
A second offense drunk driving charge carries significant penalties: mandatory jail time; 12-18 month license revocation; a fine and costs well over $1,000.00; lengthy IID installation; alcohol assessment and counseling; and a permanent entry on the driver's record. In this case, Dennis Melowski's client, JJ, avoided all of that. Although there was an accident involved, some difficult video evidence and even K-9 evidence, Dennis was ultimately able to negotiate a truly outstanding resolution for his client. In exchange for a no contest plea to Reckless Driving and Obstructing an Officer, the original OWI-2nd and PAC-2nd charges were completely dismissed. All JJ had to do was pay fines that totaled approximately $800. No jail; no license revocation; no IID installation; no counseling; not even probation. And, best of all, no drunk driving conviction.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Case #7: OWI-1st/PAC-1st (with .09 Breath Test Result) Reduced to Reckless Driving and Unreasonable/Imprudent Speed</h3>
<div>
Mission accomplished for our client, JP. As a small business owner, JP is required to travel extensively (in state and out) to meet his company's needs. The mandatory license revocation he was facing for his first-ever drunk driving charge would be a huge blow to his company's success. He no longer has to worry about that thanks to the outstanding result Dennis Melowski obtained in his case. After a devastatingly successful cross-examination of the arresting officer at JP's municipal court trial, the prosecutor knew that a conviction on the OWI charge in circuit court was in grave doubt, so he finally agreed to a result for JP that completely avoided a drunk driving conviction and resulted in no license loss. Under the terms of the agreement, JP would plead no contest to reduced charges of Reckless Driving and Imprudent Speed with the only penalty being two fines. Another very real result for a very happy client. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Case #8: OWI-1st/Refusal of Chemical Test Reduced to Reckless Driving for CDL Client</h3>
<div>
This was a major victory for Dennis Melowski's client, JK. As the head of a local public works department, JK was required to have a valid CDL for his well-paying job. Unfortunately, a drunk driving conviction results in an automatic 1-year disqualification of CDL privileges. The only way JK could salvage his career would be to not be convicted of either the OWI or the Refusal charge. And Dennis Melowski delivered. This was another case that occurred in a difficult county, with a difficult prosecutor. Nevertheless, Dennis' relentless pursuit of a legal challenge to dismiss the Refusal charge finally paid off when the prosecutor agreed to resolve JK's case with a reduced charge of Reckless Driving. This was after JK's first lawyer fought the case for nearly a year and made no headway. This is the difference superior lawyering can make. Just ask JK.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Case #9: OWI-1st/PAC-1st (with .09 Breath Test Result) Reduced to Inattentive Driving</h3>
<div>
This fantastic result for our client, CT, occurred in a Milwaukee County municipality with a well-known reputation for being very inflexible when it comes to negotiating drunk driving cases. But it only took one cross-examination of the arresting officer by our firm in court for the prosecutor to realize what they were up against. After significantly undermining this officer's credibility at a contested motion hearing, the prosecutor had little choice but to agree to our terms of resolving the case with a simple minor traffic ticket for Inattentive Driving. As an up-and-coming professional with a very bright future, CT was absolutely thrilled with this result. You will be reading his 5-star review of Dennis Melowski's work in his case in the very near future.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Case #10: OWI-1st/PAC-1st (with .11 Breath Test Result) Reduced to Inattentive Driving and a Non-Traffic City Ordinance Ticket</h3>
<div>
This outstanding result was negotiated with a prosecutor who is very familiar with Dennis Melowski's success rate at trial. Knowing that Dennis had already locked the arresting officer in with some very favorable testimony at RI's administrative suspension hearing, and not wanting to risk losing the whole case at a contested trial with Dennis, the prosecutor did the prudent thing and settled the case. Under the very favorable terms Dennis negotiated, RI would completely avoid an alcohol-related conviction and avoid all of the consequences associated with the original charges. He could not be happier. In fact, he was SO happy that he posted the following 5-star review of Dennis' work on the independent lawyer rating website Avvo:</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<div class="col-xs-12 col-md-3" style="background-color: #f9f9f9; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; float: left; font-family: "Proxima Nova", "Avenir Next", Avenir, "Century Gothic", "Helvetica Neue", Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; min-height: 1px; padding-left: 1.2rem; padding-right: 1.2rem; position: relative; width: 219.375px;">
<div class="u-vertical-padding-0" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 0.75em; padding-bottom: 0rem !important; padding-top: 0rem !important;">
<small style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 13.92px;"><span class="text-muted" style="box-sizing: border-box; opacity: 0.7;">Posted by</span> Bob <br class="hidden-xs" style="box-sizing: border-box;" /><span class="text-muted" style="box-sizing: border-box; opacity: 0.7;"><time data-format="%B %e, %Y" data-local="time" data-localized="true" datetime="2017-01-21T19:37:33Z" style="box-sizing: border-box;" title="January 21, 2017 at 1:37pm CST">January 21, 2017</time></span></small></div>
<div class="small" style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 13.92px;">
<div class="item" style="box-sizing: border-box;">
<a data-gtm="{"target_url":"https://www.avvo.com/reviews/1362181/objectionable","target_domain":"www.avvo.com","target_path":"/reviews/1362181/objectionable","target_querystring":"","link_text":"Flag","link_pagesection":"body","link_context":"","link_subcontext":""}" data-method="post" data-remote="true" data-tooltip-remote="confirm_objectionable" href="https://www.avvo.com/reviews/1362181/objectionable" id="review_objectionable_1362181" rel="nofollow" style="background: transparent; box-sizing: border-box; color: #008cc9; text-decoration: none;"><span aria-hidden="true" class="icon icon-flag medium-gray" style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; box-sizing: border-box; display: inline; font-family: "Avvo UI Icons"; line-height: 1; position: relative; top: 0.1em;"></span> </a></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="col-xs-12 col-md-9" style="background-color: #f9f9f9; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; float: left; font-family: "Proxima Nova", "Avenir Next", Avenir, "Century Gothic", "Helvetica Neue", Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; min-height: 1px; padding-left: 1.2rem; padding-right: 1.2rem; position: relative; width: 658.125px;">
<div aria-expanded="true" class="" data-truncate-label="Less <span aria-hidden="true" class="icon icon-chevron-up"></span>" data-truncate-lines="5" id="js-truncated-review-1362181" itemprop="reviewBody" style="box-sizing: border-box;">
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 0.75em;">
When I was arrested and charged with OWI and Pac I knew right away I wanted to fight it. I called two local lawyers and felt they only wanted my money and an easy guilty/no contest plea. A friend referred me to Dennis Melowski, and I was impressed right from the start. Not only was he knowledgeable but him and his staff took care of EVERYTHING. Him and his staff were always there to answer any of my questions and were always timely to reach back to me on any matter. Even before I hired Dennis he was straight with me and gave his honest opinion about my case. Oh yeah, he's also pretty damn good at his job, he got my case pled down to Inattentive driving and Disorderly conduct with a motor vehicle, with out going to court. Dennis and his team are worth every penny, and I couldn't be happier with the results. If you or any one you know needs an OWI lawyer, Dennis and his firm should be the first and last call you make.</div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 0.75em;">
<br /></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 0.75em;">
<br /></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 0.75em;">
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
</div>
Melowski Law Real Results Trackerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14139407287298455722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-47774113702105080982016-12-19T15:19:00.000-08:002016-12-20T09:12:21.131-08:00Another Hat Trick for Attorney Murray<h3>
<b>Case #1: OWI/PAC - First Offense Amended to Reckless Driving</b></h3>
After recently moving to the area, MB was drinking casually at home on his day off when he decided to go to the grocery store. On the way, distracted by his GPS device, MB lost control of his vehicle and hit a tree. When law enforcement arrived, they smelled alcohol, put MB through field sobriety tests, which MB allegedly failed, and then arrested him for Operating While Intoxicated (OWI). They also cited him with Failing to Maintain Control of Vehicle. MB was then brought to the station where he submitted to an evidentiary breath test with the reported value being .08, which is .001 over the legal limit. MB was then issued another citation for Operating with a Prohibited Alcohol Concentration (PAC).<br />
<br />
The difficulty with the .08 was the timing of the drinking history. MB told the officers that he stopped drinking an hour before the accident. With a preliminary breath test on scene above .10, and the evidentiary breath test not occurring until two and a half hours after drinking, the prosecutor asserted that MB would have been well above a .08 at the time of the accident and refused to budge.<br />
<br />
Given the prosecutor's inflexible position, MB and Attorney Murray appeared the morning of the jury trial ready to try the case. Prior to beginning, Attorney Murray offered one more time to settle the case with a Reckless Driving citation and, after some pressing, the prosecutor agreed. Ultimately, MB pled to two citations for Reckless Driving and Failing to Maintain Control of Vehicle, which come off a driving record after five years. An OWI or PAC charge remains on your driving record for 55 years. While this was a case that we believe would likely have resulted in Not Guilty verdicts (at least as to the OWI and PAC charges), MB was very happy with the outcome and this makes us happy.<br />
<br />
<h3>
<b>OWI/PAC - Third Offense Amended to engligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle and Disorderly Conduct to Avoid Any Consequences to Client's Commercial Driver's License</b></h3>
RD hired Matt Murray to represent him on an OWI/PAC - Third Offense wherein he was pulled over for erratic driving and an equipment violation. The officer detected the strong odor of intoxicants, slurred speech and glassy eyes. RB initially admitted to a couple beers, but later admitted to "four, five or six." RB failed the field sobriety tests, a preliminary breath test registered a result of .134 and a blood test returned a result of .18. To make matters worse, RD looked drunk on the video and had a CDL, which he needed for work.<br />
<br />
Attorney Murray reviewed all the records and recordings he could find and ultimately filed two motions. The first challenge was to the field sobriety tests and whether there was probable cause to administer a preliminary breath test. RD informed the officer that he had knee problems, which was simply disregarded at the time by the officer. The other issue was that on the morning this occurred, the temperature was so frigid that you could see the backup officer walking abnormally on the video due to the cold. So, how is someone supposed to perform field sobriety tests if it is so cold that an officer cannot even walk normally? Attorney Murray also filed a motion challenging RD's second offense, which would have dropped RD's conviction down to a first offense given that his first offense was more than 10 years old.<br />
<br />
Prior to the motion hearing, Attorney Murray worked out an agreement with the prosecutor to simply charge RD with two criminal charges of Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle and Disorderly Conduct. RD was placed on probation for two years and ordered to serve 10 days jail, likely at home on electronic monitoring. A fine was also imposed. However, no license revocation or ignition interlock device was imposed which would have ended RD's career as a commercial vehicle mechanic. This was also a fantastic result because the minimum jail term for a third offense is 45 days jail and at a .18 blood test, he was facing much more than 45 days. RD is thrilled, not only because his career is saved, but because he will only have to miss a week of his daughter's sporting events. Another very happy client.<br />
<br />
<h3>
<b>Operating While Intoxicated - First Offense Amended to Citation for Inattentive Driving</b></h3>
This was a situation in which MT was taking his prescriptions as prescribed but they had awful side effects, causing terrible driving and terrible field sobriety tests. The side effects were so bad that the officer arrested MT for Operating While Intoxicated (OWI). While MT may have been impaired by his prescriptions, Attorney Murray was able to prove through experts that MT was taking his medications as prescribed and confirmed the levels of drugs in MT's system were consistent with taking the medications in accordance with his doctor's instructions.<br />
<br />
Surprisingly, the prosecutor initially dug in his heels and scoffed at the suggestion that the case be amended or dismissed. Ultimately, the prosecutor did the right thing and agreed to amend the charge to a minor traffic ticket for inattentive driving. MT avoided a lengthy license revocation, having to comply with an alcohol assessment and counseling, and the fine was significantly reduced. Not to mention, the ticket will come off MT's driving record after five years, whereas the OWI would be there for 55 years. MT was extremely pleased with this fantastic result.Melowski Law Real Results Trackerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14139407287298455722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-48240440661762239942016-11-02T11:55:00.001-07:002016-11-02T11:55:20.719-07:006 More Clients Avoid Drunk Driving Convictions Across the State* <h3>
Case #1: Complete Dismissal of Charges in OWI-1st/PAC-1st Case (with .25 blood test result)</h3>
<div>
Dennis Melowski's client, LB, is employed as an electrical power lineman. A very dangerous field, but also one that is very well-paying. This line of work typically requires a valid commercial driver's license or CDL. As most CDL holders are well aware, nothing is a greater threat to their livelihood than a drunk driving conviction, which results in a one-year CDL disqualification for a first offense and a <i>lifetime</i> disqualification for a second. So when LB got arrested for his first-ever drunk driving charge, he knew he would have to fight it because his very career was at stake. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Initially, LB's case looked very bleak. His vehicle was reported by another motorist as driving erratically. He also failed the field sobriety tests on camera and made a number of incriminating statements to the officer. On top of it all, his blood test came back at .25, more than 3 times the legal limit. Despite the uphill battle, Dennis Melowski crafted his plan of attack. Arguing that LB was not legally intoxicated was likely a lost cause, so Dennis focused his attention on a legal issue that had the potential of eliminating the entire case against LB. Keeping his strategy carefully hidden, Dennis proceeded with LB's municipal court trial in an effort to pin down certain witnesses to build his case. Dennis even led the prosecutor to believe that his defense was headed in an entirely different direction than it was, so as to maximize his chances of catching the prosecutor off guard when the case got to circuit court. Dennis' plan worked to perfection. At a hearing before the circuit court judge, Dennis argued that there was not a sufficient basis for the officer to detain LB in the first place, since the motorist who reported LB told the dispatcher they wished to remain anonymous. An anonymous call to the police, with nothing more, is an insufficient reason for the police to detain you. After listening to Dennis' arguments, the judge agreed and threw out all of the evidence the police had gathered against LB, including his .25 blood test. As a result of the judge's ruling, all of the charges against LB were completely dismissed. And his career as a power lineman is thriving.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Case #2: OWI-1st/PAC-1st (with .18 breath test result) Reduced to Reckless Driving</h3>
This was also a case with difficult facts. PW was stopped for leaving the scene of a minor traffic accident. She allegedly failed the field sobriety tests and had a breath test result of .18, more than twice the legal limit. Nevertheless, she had to do whatever she could to avoid a drunk driving conviction. As a Registered Nurse Hospital Consultant, PW traveled the country helping hospitals implement the latest training to their nursing staffs. Well-regarded in her field, PW was highly sought-after and had a lucrative career. Unfortunately, her drunk driving arrest threatened all that. Not only would she suffer an irreparable hit to her reputation if convicted, her driving privileges would be revoked and she would be required to install an ignition interlock device in her vehicle, making her extensive travel needs nearly impossible to meet. Fortunately, after much research, PW was referred to Dennis Melowski by multiple sources due to his unmatched reputation in his field. And it was Dennis' reputation that resulted in the fantastic outcome in PW's case. Despite the many factual hurdles, the prosecutor handling the case was well-aware of the success Dennis has had against the officers from the particular police agency involved in this case. Rather than risk losing the whole case, the prosecutor agreed to reduce the drunk driving charge to Reckless Driving, a non-alcohol-related traffic offense that carries no license loss and no ignition interlock requirement, just a fine. Not only were PW's driving privileges completely spared, so was her hard-earned reputation. Needless to say, she couldn't be happier.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Case #3: OWI-1st/PAC-1st (with .14 blood test result) Reduced to Two Minor Traffic Tickets</h3>
Few professional reputations can suffer more from a drunk driving conviction than physicians, particularly surgeons. Such a conviction can result in professional discipline, the loss of hospital privileges, and a black mark that will scare off potential employers for years. For these reasons, the client's initials will not even be used in this post, nor will any specific circumstances of the case be described. Suffice it say, though, this was a particularly difficult set of facts. However, at a contested motion hearing, Dennis Melowski was able to expose just enough potential problems with the prosecutor's case to lay the groundwork for an outstanding result. After extensive negotiations, Dennis was able to convince the prosecutor to drop the original OWI and PAC charges. Instead, the client would plead no contest to two minor traffic tickets: Inattentive Driving and Unsafe Lane Deviation. Aside from paying a fine and agreeing to some community service work, this client suffered no consequences. Their professional reputation remains fully intact, as do their full hospital affiliations.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Case #4: Complete Dismissal of ALL Charges in OWI-1st/PAC-1st Case (with .09 blood test result and prescription drugs)</h3>
Sometimes clients choose to fight their case because they simply cannot fathom the thought of being a convicted drunk driver. That was primarily the case for our client, LW. Although mostly retired after a successful career in a variety of business ventures, LW still served on a few boards and was involved in a number of community programs. She couldn't bear the thought of what a drunk driving conviction would do to her reputation, so she decided to fight it. And Dennis Melowski delivered for her in a big way. Based on the officer's own squad video, Dennis did not believe there was probable cause for LW to be arrested in the first place. After Dennis expertly cross-examined the officer in court, the judge agreed. All of the evidence in the case was then thrown out and all of the charges against LW were dismissed. It is difficult to put into words just how happy LW was with the result Dennis achieved, so we thought she could tell you in her own words. This was the note of thanks Dennis received shortly after he delivered the great news to his client:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px; text-align: left;">
<span style="background-color: transparent;"> </span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px; text-align: left;">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;">Hi Super Hero,</span><span style="background-color: transparent;"> </span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px; text-align: left;">
<br />I hope you received my "thank you a million!!" voicemail yesterday. I left you my joyous regards and wasn't sure at the end because it was a long message that it sent as the usual <i>"do you want to send with regular delivery" robot</i> didn't come on<span style="background-color: transparent;"> </span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px; text-align: left;">
<br />I am like a different person since you sent me the great news! It's not like jumping up and down different...it's like "peaceful feeling, relaxed face and shoulders from no more strife and worry" feeling. I was stunned and still am I think. I knew you were brilliant but this result made you like a God..lol<span style="font-size: 12.8px;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent;"> </span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.8px;"> </span><br />Anyways, I am amazed at you being such a wonderful champion for me. I've always been a career champion to others but had never needed anybody to do something for me, and did I mention in my message that I was there for the trial. NOT in the courtroom but I drove down that night and stayed at my Clarion Suites, pacing so much that finally my friends took me out to calm down on their yacht.<span style="background-color: transparent;"> </span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px; text-align: left;">
<br /> I am good people, you are good people, and I hope always for those who may or not be good. That they will become good at some point. Life is better when you are good to others. Enjoy your weekend.</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<h3>
Case #5: OWI-1st/Refusal of Chemical Test Reduced to Minor Traffic Ticket and City Ordinance Violation</h3>
<div>
Another CDL client's career was saved in this case. JB was charged with drunk driving and refusing a breath test after being stopped for speeding more than 20mph over the limit. This was a major problem for JB given his employment as a waste disposal driver for a large corporation, a great job with even better benefits. And it was all in jeopardy due to JB's arrest. In fact, as soon as his company found out about it, they relegated JB to a non-driving position at half the pay. They also made it clear that he would be fully terminated if convicted of either the OWI or Refusal offenses. Thanks to Dennis Melowski's exceptionally shrewd lawyering, that never happened. Dennis was able to convince the prosecutor to reduce the OWI charge to Inattentive Driving, a completely non-alcohol-related, minor traffic offense that carries no license loss. In addition, Dennis got the Refusal charge reduced to a local city ordinance violation that would not even appear on JB's driver record. As a result of this amazing resolution, JB is back to driving full-time. And is one VERY happy client.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Case #6: OWI-1st/Refusal of Chemical Test Reduced to Minor Traffic Offense</h3>
<div>
This was another outcome that saved the client's career. LJ is a very successful IT consultant. He travels the country helping a variety of businesses with their IT needs. Given his almost constant need to rent cars, a valid driver's license is a necessity. Without one, LJ would lose his job...and a LOT of money. So when LJ picked up an OWI and Refusal of chemical test charge, he had to find the best attorney in the state to fight it. Most of our clients are referred to us and LJ was no exception. He had been told by every source he consulted that there was only one firm for the job: Melowski & Associates. And the firm definitely didn't disappoint. After more than a year of legal wrangling, Dennis Melowski was finally able to negotiate a fantastic, and career-saving, outcome. The original OWI and Refusal charges were dropped in exchange for LJ's plea of no contest to a single minor traffic ticket for Inattentive Driving. Aside from paying a fine, LJ suffered no consequences. Not only did he completely avoid the stigma of a drunk driving conviction, his career is stronger than ever. He couldn't be happier.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
*These results occurred in the following counties, in no particular order: Dane, Marathon, Sheboygan, Fond du Lac and Racine.</div>
Melowski Law Real Results Trackerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14139407287298455722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-58577701612601150192016-10-20T13:24:00.000-07:002016-10-20T13:24:04.340-07:00Another Jury Trial Win for Dennis Melowski: Client Found Not Guilty of all charges in OWI-4th/PAC-4th (with .154 blood test result)Prosecutors are rarely willing to plea bargain an OWI-4th. In fact, most dig their heels in even more at this level of offense. And that certainly was the case with Dennis Melowski's client, JP. By the letter of the law, JP was plainly guilty of operating while intoxicated, unfortunately for the fourth time. Despite that, Dennis believed he had a very good chance of convincing a jury of JP's peers that he was not guilty. How? By appealing to the jurors' sense of fairness. Although technical guilt was clear, moral guilt was very much not. The most successful trial lawyers, the ones at the very top of their profession, know how to present their arguments to juries in such a way that jurors may look past the letter of the law to do what's right. And after only 15 minutes of deliberation, the jury did just that. They found JP NOT GUILTY of all charges. He couldn't possibly be happier. Melowski Law Real Results Trackerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14139407287298455722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-75382345504431199582016-09-09T11:31:00.002-07:002016-09-09T11:35:07.350-07:00Attorney Murray Obtains Two Outstanding Results for Clients Charged with Third Offenses<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">OWI/PAC - Third Offense Completely Dismissed</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: large;">Around bar time, CP pulled off on a smaller side-street to manipulate his GPS device. An officer passing by pulled him over on the basis that there had been recent burglaries at the business where CP was stopped and also characterized the side-street as a driveway for the business, which it was not. That led to CP's arrest for OWI/PAC - Third Offense. After filing an open records request, it was discovered that there was one burglary at the business and it occurred over a year prior to the stop of CP. Attorney Murray filed multiple motions, with one being a challenge to the stop of CP's vehicle. The day of the motion hearing, the prosecutor agreed and dismissed all charges. CP could not be happier and neither could we.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">OWI/PAC - Third Offense Amended to Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle and Saves Client's Career</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: large;">JH had a lucrative trade career, which required that he travel throughout Wisconsin and the United States. Unfortunately, an OWI - Third Offense conviction results in mandatory penalties such as a lengthy jail sentence and a lengthy license revocation that would all result in the loss of JH's career. Given that this case involved a .217 blood-alcohol concentration and an accident, the prosecutor was unwilling to resolve the case in a way that allowed JH to keep his career. The case was destined for trial.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: large;">The morning of trial, after having picked the jury, the prosecutor was informed that the arresting officer was unavailable. Unfortunately for JH, the news reached the courtroom within minutes of the jury being sworn, which is when double jeopardy protections would have begun. Thus, the prosecution was free to dismiss the case and re-file it. Knowing this, Attorney Murray seized the opportunity and worked out a fantastic agreement. JH was convicted of Negligent Operation and agreed to pay a monetary penalty, complete alcohol treatment, and voluntarily install an ignition interlock device in his personal vehicle for two years. JH never lost his license and never served any jail time.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: large;">Sometimes you get lucky, but such an outcome could not have happened without the perseverance and knowledge necessary to fight the case. We would like to think Attorney Murray would have won the trial anyways, but the opportunity to save his career was too much for JH to risk.</span></div>
Melowski Law Real Results Trackerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14139407287298455722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-21465088674155602012016-08-02T10:17:00.001-07:002016-08-02T10:22:16.523-07:005 Fantastic Results for Attorney Singh's Clients: 3 Complete Dismissals and 2 Complete Acquittals at Trial<h2>
<span style="font-size: large;">Case #1: Complete Dismissal of OWI-1st/PAC-1st Charges (with .11 test result)</span></h2>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;">
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 18.4px;">Anyone who reads this blog knows that many of our clients hold a commercial driver's license (CDL). For many families, a commercial license serves as their sole source of income. That was the situation for BNL, a commercial truck driver who travels throughout the state for work. When he was stopped and arrested for Operating While Intoxicated, First Offense, his entire livelihood was at stake. With an alcohol content of .11, he reached out to Attorney Sarvan Singh. Attorney Singh noticed a peculiarity in how the officer performed the sobriety tests. He filed a motion challenging the arrest. After a contentious hearing, the judge agreed with Attorney Singh and dismissed all of the charges against BNL. Once the charges were officially dismissed, BNL was able to get back to work immediately, and most importantly, get back to supporting his family. He could not be happier.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;">
<span style="background-color: black;"><span style="color: white;"><br /></span></span></div>
<h2 style="font-family: "arial" , sans-serif;">
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-size: large;">Case #2: Complete Dismissal of OWI-3rd/PAC-3rd Charges (with .20 blood test result)</span></h2>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;">
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 18.4px;">BOB was arrested for Operating While Intoxicated, Third Offense. It was a complicated case that involved dreadful driving, an accident, and a blood alcohol level over .20. Along with these aggravated factors was the reality that this took place in a very unforgiving county. BOB reached out to Attorney Sarvan Singh. Attorney Singh poured over the police reports looking for anything that may break BOB's way. Unfortunately, there was very little to work with. Attorney Singh sat down with BOB to discuss the limited options in his case, at which point, BOB mentioned something that piqued Attorney Singh's curiosity. Attorney Singh investigated the issue further and, much to BOB's delight, Attorney Singh was able to convince the prosecutor to dismiss the case...in its entirety! Instead of facing a year behind bars; a 3 year license revocation; thousands of dollars in in fines; and years of an ignition interlock device, BOB walked out of the courthouse completely cleared of all charges. A truly fantastic result.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;">
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 18.4px;"><br /></span></div>
<h3 style="font-family: arial, sans-serif;">
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-size: large; line-height: 18.4px;">Case #3: Jury Finds Client NOT GUILTY in OWI-2nd Case </span></h3>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;">
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 18.4px;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;">
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 18.4px;">DES was facing an OWI-2nd in a county notorious for not amending OWI charges. DES could not afford such a conviction. He needed his license to work and without it, his business would completely collapse. DES had hired another lawyer previously, but after spending well over a year with the other attorney not getting anywhere with the case, he decided to hire Attorney Sarvan Singh to fight the case. Attorney Singh explained to DES that his only option was to go to trial and fight to win. That's when Attorney Singh went to work. After spending countless hours reviewing reports, open records, audio and video recordings, Attorney Singh was ready for the challenge of saving DES's future. Thanks to a brutally effective cross-examination of the arresting officer, the jury came back with a verdict of not guilty. After nearly three years, DES finally got the resolution he had been looking for. Another very satisfied client.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;">
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 18.4px;"><br /></span></div>
<h3 style="font-family: arial, sans-serif;">
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-size: large; line-height: 18.4px;">Case #4: Jury Finds CDL Client NOT GUILTY of All Charges in OWI-1st/PAC-1st Case (with .18 test result)</span></h3>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;">
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 18.4px;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;">
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 18.4px;">MOS is a young commercial driver with a very bright future. A hard and reliable worker, MOS had become a favorite employee. Then, the unimaginable happened- MOS was arrested for drunk driving. With a blood test of .18, things were dire for MOS. After speaking with numerous attorneys who told them there was nothing they could do for her, MOS hired Attorney Sarvan Singh. With a prosecutor unwilling to reduce the charge, Attorney Singh readied for trial. After a scathing cross-examination of the arresting officer, Attorney Singh went to work on the blood analyst, effectively exposing a variety of errors at the laboratory. In the end, the jury returned verdicts of NOT GUILTY. With the weight of losing a promising career lifted, MOS broke down in tears in open court. To this day, MOS will randomly contact Attorney Singh just to say, "thank you." And she has already referred others to our firm.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;">
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 18.4px;"><br /></span></div>
<h3 style="font-family: arial, sans-serif;">
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-size: large; line-height: 18.4px;">Case #5: OWI-2nd Reduced to Reckless Driving Ticket</span></h3>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;">
<span style="background-color: black;"><span style="color: white;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;">
<span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 18.4px;">Many people believe that if a person wasn't observed driving, they can't be charged with Operating While Intoxicated. Nothing is further from the truth. In fact, many people who contact our office were doing nothing more than sitting in their vehicles. However, because of how vigorously and technically the drunk driving laws are enforced, many people are charge with drunk driving even though no one saw them drive. That was the situation for PAO. He was in a parking lot, leaned back in the driver's seat, asleep. He was awakened by officers and subsequently arrested for Operating While Intoxicated, Second Offense. Attorney Singh examined all of the evidence and the dubious way that PAO was questioned, tested, and eventually taken into custody. After exposing several problems with how PAO was detained and arrested, the prosecutor agreed to amend the charge to Reckless Driving, a resolution PAO was more than happy to accept. He avoided a mandatory jail sentence, lengthy license loss, mandatory IID installation and, most importantly, he avoided a drunk driving conviction. Aside from paying a fine, PAO suffered no consequences and he is one very happy client.</span></div>
<div class="yj6qo ajU" style="cursor: pointer; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px; margin: 2px 0px 0px; outline: none; padding: 10px 0px; width: 22px;">
<div aria-label="Show trimmed content" class="ajR" data-tooltip="Show trimmed content" id=":1er" role="button" style="border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-source: initial; border-image-width: initial; border: 1px solid rgb(221, 221, 221); clear: both; line-height: 6px; outline: none; position: relative; width: 20px;" tabindex="0">
<span style="background-color: black;"><span style="color: white;"><img class="ajT" src="https://ssl.gstatic.com/ui/v1/icons/mail/images/cleardot.gif" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: url("//ssl.gstatic.com/ui/v1/icons/mail/ellipsis.png"); background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: no-repeat; background-size: initial; height: 8px; opacity: 0.3; width: 20px;" /></span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
Melowski Law Real Results Trackerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14139407287298455722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2833479537444857098.post-49342415692985531622016-06-17T14:19:00.001-07:002016-08-02T10:31:37.459-07:00Another Trial Victory for Dennis Melowski: Jury Finds Client Not Guilty in OWI-1st/PAC-1st (with .15 blood test)<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: medium;">Sometimes our clients can say it even better than we can. Here is the 5-star review* that Dennis Melowski's client, MB, posted on the independent lawyer rating website Avvo after Dennis won** his case at a jury trial just two weeks ago:<br />Not Guilty at Trial<br />5.0 stars<br />Posted by Matthew<br />June 5, 2016<br />I hired Dennis Melowski after much research. Let me spare you the pointless research, hire him. If you want the best, your search is over. I was pulled over for an equipment violation, and arrested for OWI. A condition of my employment was to keep a valid license. I never went a day without it. He filed a motion with the judge to stay my license revocation until the matter was resolved. He has the reputation of winning at trial, so much so, that many District Attorney offices will plea it out to a non-alcohol charge. This is what the ADA wanted to do in my case, but the new DA wanted to make a name for themselves and wouldn't budge (their mistake). He filed motions, requested documents from the lab that tested my blood (.15), and did so much more. I was very impressed with him at trial, his cross examination of the DA's witnesses was unbelievable. The time and planning he put into it was remarkable, and it showed. He was able to point out many factors that showed the case against me wasn't black and white, and that it was very hard to trust the evidence they presented against me. During trial he explained everything to me, and asked for my input. The respect he gives you is of the highest level possible. My case took over 2 years to trial and he always kept an open two way conversation with me. He got me a NOT GUILTY verdict on all alcohol related charges! You simply can't make a mistake in acquiring him to represent you. Look no further, Dennis Melowski should be your only consideration!<br />* Dennis Melowski has 78 client reviews on the Avvo website and each and every one is 5 stars. Dennis has more 5-star reviews than any drunk driving defense attorney in Wisconsin.<br />** Dennis' victory in this case was his 12th of his last 16 drunk driving cases that have proceeded to jury trial. This is a rate of success that simply cannot be matched. If you are considering other lawyers to defend a case as potentially life-altering as a drunk driving offense, be sure to ask them the outcomes of their last 10 drunk driving trials. Make them be specific. You will likely be shocked by what you hear. If they even give you an answer.</span></div>
Melowski Law Real Results Trackerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14139407287298455722noreply@blogger.com