January 31, 2013: Jury Finds Client Not Guilty in OWI-1st Case (with .186 Blood Test Result)

"How can you possibly help me when my blood test says I was legally drunk?" Without a doubt, this is the most common question we are asked when people call us to assess their drunk driving case. It's a fair question. Here's the answer. While most attorneys would look at a .186 blood test result as an insurmountable obstacle to a successful defense, the attorneys at Melowski & Associates know better than to blindly accept the validity of a testing process that can be rife with errors. From how the blood sample was drawn and packaged, to the police officer's handling of the specimen, to the factory-like processing of the sample at the over-worked lab, we have uncovered countless instances in which there was plenty of reason to doubt the test result. In turn, countless of our clients have avoided the life-altering stigma of a drunk driving conviction because they hired attorneys who are skilled enough to successfully counter evidence that most lawyers would run from.

This was the exact situation that Attorney Sarvan Singh was confronted with when SJK first called our office to discuss his case. SJK had crashed his motorcycle, receiving significant injuries in the process. While SJK was being treated by medical personnel at the scene, a state trooper arrived and began questioning him about drinking. In response, SJK made several very damaging statements. While he was being loaded into the ambulance, the trooper told him he was under arrest for drunk driving and that he would have to submit to a blood test at the hospital. The result of that test was devastating to SJK: .186, more than twice the legal limit of .08. After consulting with other attorneys who told him he had no chance, SJK called Melowski & Associates after being referred by a former prosecutor who simply gave SJK the following advice: "Don't waste your time or money hiring anybody but these guys." Although SJK was very disheartened by what he had been told by the other lawyers he had spoken to, he had to fight his case because his career depended on it.

After listening to SJK's version of events, and pouring over every police report and lab document he could get his hands on, Attorney Singh knew there was hope. Since the overconfident prosecutor was not interested in giving SJK any breaks (prosecutors, too, have blind faith in test results, usually to their detriment), Attorney Singh knew the case was destined for trial. He needed to get creative. First, he was able to craft a legal argument to convince the judge that the statements SJK made to the trooper at the scene of the crash should be thrown out because they were obtained illegally. Second, Attorney Singh found SEVERAL problems with the equipment the lab used to test SJK's blood. Third, in the middle of trial, Attorney Singh, in a blistering cross-examination, caught the trooper in a significant change to his story that was never documented in his report. It was a major turning point in the case because it cast significant doubt on the rest of the trooper's bogus claims. In the end, the jury rejected not only the trooper's testimony, but the tainted blood result, too. SJK was found NOT GUILTY of all charges and walked out of the courthouse completely exonerated. A few days later, SJK sent a letter to Attorney Singh that said the following:

"I can't say enough good things about Sarvan. During my trial, it became very evident how much time and research he had done in preparation for trial. I truly believe that, regardless of the outcome, there was no one better able to represent me."

Never doubt the difference a top-notch attorney can make.

     

January 28, 2013: OWI-1st/PAC-1st Reduced to Reckless Driving

Many of our clients hire us because of the profound consequences a drunk driving conviction will have on their jobs and their ability to find work in the future. That was certainly the case with LDJ, who was stopped and arrested in one of his company's trucks. LDJ is employed  by a well-known window company as a supervisor-installer. It's a job he's had for several years and he is regarded as a valued employee. But company policy is pretty clear cut. If you get convicted of drunk driving, especially if the incident involves a company-owned vehicle, you're out of a job. LDJ simply could not afford to do anything but fight the case. So LDJ gave Dennis Melowski a call after being referred by a friend. When Dennis first looked at all of the evidence, it looked like LDJ might have an uphill battle, since he was called in by another driver who gave a detailed statement to the police about how dangerously LDJ was supposedly driving. This was on top of both a roadside breath test and police department breath test that were over the legal limit. But after Dennis thoroughly questioned the arresting officer at LDJ's suspension hearing, things began to quickly improve. As it turns out, the arresting officer followed LDJ a considerable distance after receiving the complaint from the other driver and noticed no problems at all with LDJ's driving. The officer simply decided to "check him out" just in case. This admission by the officer provided Dennis some much-needed ammunition to raise a potential legal challenge to LDJ's initial stop. Other problems in the case soon became apparent. The officer's own squad video showed LDJ doing a very good job on the field sobriety tests, casting significant doubt on the other driver's claims that LDJ was so intoxicated that he was "all over the road." In the end, Dennis made it apparent to the prosecutor that a conviction on the drunk driving charges would be difficult. Dennis negotiated a very favorable resolution for LDJ. The drunk driving charges were dropped. Instead, LDJ plead no contest to a reduced charge of Reckless Driving, which is a non-alcohol-related traffic offense that carries no loss of license. LDJ just had to pay a fine that was about half the amount of the one he had been facing. More importantly, by avoiding a drunk driving conviction, LDJ kept his job and his career is thriving. Another very satisfied client.  

January 15, 2013: OWI-1st (with .108 Blood Test Result) Reduced to Reckless Driving

As a power lineman for a large electrical company, GTK is required to operate all manner of heavy equipment, which requires him to have fully valid commercial driving privileges at all times. As a CDL holder, GTK is well aware of the brutal consequences a DUI charge can have. Professionally, it's like a death-sentence. Once you're a convicted drunk driver, most company's won't touch you with a ten-foot pole, even years down the road. In the commercial driving world, convicted drunk drivers are viewed as little more than damaged goods. So when GTK was stopped for speeding after a night out at the bar with some co-workers, his professional life literally flashed before his eyes the moment the cop asked him if he'd been drinking. He honestly thought his lucrative career as a lineman was over. GTK's fear only grew as he struggled through the roadside tests the officer had him perform. Even worse, when the cop searched GTK's vehicle post-arrest, he found an uncased handgun, so GTK was also arrested for Carrying a Concealed Weapon, a serious charge. The result of the blood test after GTK's arrest was like the final nail in his professional coffin: .108, over the legal limit and "scientific proof" that GTK was guilty. GTK knew he needed help, but didn't know where to turn. As it turns out, one of GTK's co-workers knew that Dennis Melowski had gotten two other linemen in the company out of their DUI charges and kept one of Dennis' cards in his wallet--just in case. GTK jotted down Dennis' number and gave him a call. It turned out to be the smartest phone call GTK ever made. After months of relentless litigation, and just an hour before GTK's trial was about to start, the prosecutor, well aware of Dennis' track record in trial, finally decided it would be better to just settle the case. A very favorable deal was reached. The drunk driving charges were dropped. Instead, GTK plead no contest to a reduced charge of Reckless Driving, which would have no impact on GTK's regular or commercial driving privileges. In fact, GTK didn't lose his license for even a single day. Aside from paying a fine, GTK suffered no consequences from this incident. And the Carrying a Concealed Weapon Charge? It was resolved as a simple municipal ordinance violation carrying a small fine. GTK's career as a lineman was saved. Another Real Result in the books.  

January 11, 2013: OWI-1st/Refusal of Chemical Test Case (with .194 blood test result) Reduced to County Ordidnance Violation

At Melowski & Associates, we don't take anything lying down, especially if it involves the questionable actions or tactics of a prosecutor. Perhaps there is no better illustration of this than the nearly two-year-long odyssey of our client's case in County of M. v. AMO. AMO had been involved in a one-vehicle rollover accident in which her husband was injured. To protect her commercial-driver husband from possible DUI charges that would end his driving career, AMO told the police at the hospital that she was driving at the time the accident occurred, even though the truth was she wasn't. As a result of her "confession," the police arrested AMO and requested that she submit to a blood test. Like many people, AMO believed saying no to such a request was within her rights. Unfortunately, that is not the case under Wisconsin's tough "Implied Consent" Law. Despite her refusal of consent, the police forced her to submit to the blood draw. The result was .194, more than double the legal limit. With all of this evidence against her, things were looking bleak for AMO. Although she sacrificed herself to save her husband, she had her own career to worry about and being a convicted drunk driver had the potential to be devastating.

When Dennis Melowski took over AMO's case, his mission was clear: convince the prosecutor that AMO was not driving when the accident occurred, despite her confession to the police. This would be no easy task, since prosecutors hear these sorts of claims all the time and rarely believe them. So Dennis would have to make his case to the prosecutor with cold, hard facts. To do this, Dennis approached the case like a police officer investigating a crime, looking for any small clue that would establish AMO's innocence. After months of relentless examination, Dennis had uncovered plenty of evidence to prove that AMO was not the driver. He was ready to make his case to the prosecutor. And he did exactly that at AMO's first pretrial conference. In fact, the meeting with the prosecutor went so well that at the end of the negotiations a very favorable plea agreement had been reached. The prosecutor agreed to drop the drunk driving and refusal charges if AMO agreed to plead no contest to a very minor, non-alcohol-related county ordinance violation, which would carry no loss of license and would not even appear on AMO's driver record. AMO would pay a very small fine of $50.00 but would otherwise suffer no consequences. On his way back to his office that day, Dennis called AMO with this terrific news. Needless to say, she was elated with the outcome. All Dennis had to do the next day was draft some paperwork for the plea agreement and the deal would be done.

But when Dennis got to his office the next morning, there was a startling email from the prosecutor waiting for him. Not only was she withdrawing her offer from the day before (after it had already been accepted), she was now threatening AMO with the issuance of criminal charges for the injuries her husband sustained in the accident. The prosecutor gave AMO an ultimatum: plead guilty to the charges she was already facing or criminal charges would ensue. Little did this prosecutor know, however, Dennis doesn't respond well to threats, nor will he sit idly by when a prosecutor reneges on a plea agreement that had already been accepted. Dennis rejected the prosecutor's ultimatum in no uncertain terms. The gloves were now officially off.

For the next 14 months, there was no court activity in AMO's case. No hearings were scheduled and there was no inquiry from the court as to the status of the case. Everyone was waiting for the prosecutor to prepare and finalize the criminal case against she had threatened against AMO. As it turns out, however, the prosecutor never did anything to prepare a criminal case against AMO. Not one thing. The case simply languished in a file drawer somewhere for more than a year. The prosecutor's explanation? She's a "busy prosecutor" and the case "slipped through the cracks." Dennis had had enough. He filed a withering Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Prosecute, arguing to the judge that AMO's Due Process rights had been violated repeatedly by the actions of the prosecutor. The judge scheduled a hearing on Dennis' motion. But the day before the hearing, Dennis received a surprising phone call. It was from a different prosecutor in the same office. This prosecutor very humbly explained that the old prosecutor was "no longer with their office" and that he had been assigned to take over AMO's case. The new prosecutor apologized for "all of the problems with the case" and agreed to reinstate the original plea agreement that had been reached more than a year before. The drunk driving and refusal charges were dropped. AMO paid a $50.00 fine and has no trace of these charges on her driving record. Justice was finally done. The lesson? Given the choice between standing up and lying down, always stand up. Especially for your clients.      

December 4, 2012: Jury Finds Client Not Guilty in OWI-1st Case (with .20 Breath Test Result)

In Wisconsin, there are certain counties that are notorious for taking a very hard line approach to drunk driving cases. Some of these counties even have a strict "no plea bargain " policy, meaning they will not reduce a drunk driving charge under almost any circumstance. You either plead guilty as charged or take the case to trial. Ozaukee County would certainly fall into this category. Our client, JEG, had the misfortune of being arrested for her first offense in this tough county. From day one, Dennis Melowski knew JEG's case was destined for trial and he prepared it accordingly. And he definitely had his work cut out for him. JEG was called in by another driver who claimed she repeatedly crossed the centerline while he was behind her. This call prompted an Ozaukee County sheriff's deputy to follow JEG for 3 miles, making similar observations. When JEG was stopped, the deputy claimed he smelled intoxicants and asked her to get out of her car. On the side of a busy highway, she was subjected to 3 different field sobriety tests, all of which she supposedly failed. She was arrested and taken to the Ozaukee County sheriff's department for a breath test, the result of which was .20, two and a half times the legal limit. With all this evidence, the case against JEG initially looked very strong and Ozaukee County wasn't interested in giving her any breaks.

But as is typically the case, there are two sides to every story. As Dennis dug deeper and deeper into the case, he realized it wasn't nearly as strong as it first appeared. It started with JEG's insistence that she had only 4 drinks over a several hour period of time, an amount that couldn't possibly yield a .20 breath test result. For the breath test to be right, JEG would have needed to drink more than 3 times the amount she was so sure she had. The circumstances surrounding her drinking simply did not allow JEG to have had that much to drink. In fact, she had never had that much to drink at one time in her entire life. Something had to be wrong with the breath test result. And there was. Through his investigation, Dennis was able to prove that  "residual mouth alcohol" contaminated JEG's first blow into the machine. When residual mouth alcohol is present, the officer is required to wait 20 minutes before attempting another breath test, allowing time for the residual alcohol to dissipate. The officer's own training manual is explicitly clear on this point. But the officer never followed this important protocol. Alarmingly, he didn't wait the required 20 minutes because he "didn't think it was a big deal." The Ozaukee County prosecutor even called an expert witness at the trial to try to back up this absurd claim. But the problems with the case against JEG didn't end with the breath test. As it turns out, the other driver who reported JEG portrayed her driving much differently at trial than how it was originally portrayed in the police report. In fact, by the time Dennis finished cross-examining this witness, it was clear there were very few "problems" with JEG's driving at all, aside from things that you would see almost any driver do if you followed them long enough. The officer who arrested JEG didn't fare much better when confronted on the stand by Dennis. He admitted that none of his observations of JEG had been recorded on his fully functioning squad video camera because "he pushed the wrong button." By this point in the trial there was a distinct theme developing: Dennis kept pointing out mistake after mistake and the County kept offering flimsy excuse after flimsy excuse. In the end, though, the jury saw right through this sad attempt to salvage an obviously broken case. And they sent their message to the County loud and clear: JEG was Not Guilty on all charges. She was completely exonerated. JEG was overcome with emotion and relief when the jury announced their verdict. After nearly two years of trying to clear her good name, justice had finally been delivered. It couldn't have happened to a more deserving person.  

December 2, 2012: Complete Dismissal of OWI-1st/Refusal of Chemical Test Case (with .12 Blood Test Result)

At 63 years of age with a spotless driving record, a drunk driving arrest was the last thing MDH ever thought would happen to him. It was certainly the furthest thing on his mind when he came up to Wisconsin for a day of boating on Lake Michigan. After all, this was something MDH had done countless times before without incident. But as he made his way back to his Dad's place to spend the evening after his day on the lake, a police officer noticed that one of MDH's headlights was burnt out and he was pulled over. After the officer smelled alcohol on MDH's breath, this routine traffic stop soon turned into a full-blown drunk driving investigation. MDH was put through a battery of field sobriety tests and arrested on the spot. He was taken to the local police department for a breath test, which he allegedly refused. "Why should I consent?," he thought. "I shouldn't even be here." The police, however, wouldn't take "no" for an answer. They forced MDH into a squad car and drove him to the nearest hospital for a blood draw against his will. Shockingly, such a procedure is considered lawful in Wisconsin, even for a 63-year-old first-time offender. When they got to the hospital the police made it very clear to MDH: submit to the blood test or we will tie you down and take it from you anyway. Terrified at the presence of what was now several officers, MDH reluctantly stuck out his arm and allowed his blood to be taken. The result was hard for MDH to fathom: .120, one and a half times more than the legal limit of .08. Suddenly, MDH's world seemed to be crashing in on him. As a result of a minor equipment defect of which he wasn't even aware, he was now facing charges of OWI-1st, PAC-1st and Unlawful Refusal of Chemical test, based on his refusal of the breath test at the police department. Very serious charges, especially for someone who has been a law-abiding citizen his entire life. None of this sat very well with MDH. He was horrified at how he had been treated by the police and did not believe for one minute that he was drunk behind the wheel. He knew how much he had to drink that day and knew darn well it wouldn't add up to a .12 alcohol level. Something just wasn't right. MDH was determined to fight these charges, on principle alone.

MDH came to see Dennis Melowski after being referred by a local business owner. When Dennis heard him tell his side of the story, he knew MDH was right to be upset. There were many things the police did improperly and even more that just just didn't add up. Through his investigation, Dennis learned the police had followed MDH for a considerable time before stopping him for the headlight violation. During that whole time (captured on video) there wasn't one thing wrong with MDH's driving. He was going precisely the speed limit, stopped at every stop sign, signaled every turn, and never once deviated from his lane. And although the cops insisted that his speech was slurred, it sounded clear as a bell on the video. And the inconsistencies didn't end there. The cops also claimed that MDH "stumbled" when he exited his vehicle, a fact that was flatly contradicted by the video evidence. Even more troubling was the fact that the cops deliberately moved MDH out of camera range to perform his sobriety tests, thereby making it impossible for him to contradict the officers' version of how he did on them. To top it all off, despite repeatedly telling the cops that he had recently undergone a hip replacement, they made MDH perform the tests anyway, a nearly impossible task for someone still recovering from such a procedure. Sound fair? Dennis didn't think so either, so he filed a motion to dismiss the charges. A hearing was held in front of the judge assigned to the case and Dennis took the officers to task about all of the problems with the case. They had no explanation. At the close of the hearing, the judge had heard enough. It was as plain to him as it was to Dennis that MDH should never have been arrested in the first place. All charges were dismissed. MDH walked out of the courthouse completely exonerated. And he still has a spotless record. Sometimes there is no better reason to fight a case than principle.

November 29, 2012: OWI-1st (with .12 Blood Test Result) Reduced to Minor Speeding Ticket

For the last 7 years, KJB has enjoyed a great job with a large heating and cooling company as a commercial installer. The job requires KJB to drive a company van and travel extensively throughout Wisconsin and the adjoining states. The job pays well and has great benefits, but it also requires KJB to possess fully valid driving privileges at all times. The mere hint of a drunk driving conviction would result in KJB's immediate termination, despite his value to the company. This is because the company's insurance carrier forbids access to company vehicles or equipment for anyone with a DUI charge on the record. In this economy, no one can afford to be jobless. It's just too hard to find good work. So when KJB was stopped for speeding, failed the field sobriety tests and produced a .12 on his blood test, he was highly motivated to do whatever he could to avoid a drunk driving conviction--and save his job. Fortunately, a friend of KJB's was a former client of Dennis Melowski and urged KJB to give Dennis a call. KJB's friend assured him that if anyone could help, it would be Dennis. KJB took his friend's advice and hired Dennis. Almost immediately, Dennis laid the groundwork for the successful defense of KJB's case. Through meticulous questioning of the arresting officer at KJB's administrative suspension hearing, Dennis exposed some significant deficiencies in the officer's investigation of KJB. From procedures that weren't followed properly to a laundry list of things the officer would have expected to see but did not, Dennis severely undercut the strength of the officer's case against KJB. These holes in the case were eventually brought to the attention of the prosecutor in the form of legal challenges Dennis filed and in persistent negotiations with the prosecutor. Ultimately, just days before the second round of motion hearings in the case, the prosecutor realized that the prospect of a drunk driving conviction was in grave doubt. An incredible deal was reached. The drunk driving charges were dropped. In exchange, KJB agreed to a no contest plea to the most minor speeding infraction (1-10mph over the limit). He paid a fine of $175.30, but otherwise suffered no consequences. He never lost his license for even a single day and avoided the awful stigma of being a convicted drunk driver. And he still has his job.