OWI Lawyers and Criminal Defense Attorneys in Milwaukee, Mequon and Waukesha, WI.
Homicide
A homicide prosecution requires a strong response, and it is not a road that you should travel alone. If you are facing homicide charges, you should make sure to consult an experienced criminal defense attorney like Paul Ksicinski. He will bring many years of experience defending Wisconsin residents from prosecution to protect your rights and aggressively fight the charges against you.
There are numerous methods that I use in defending Homicides. Homicide charges may be "justified" if it was committed out of self defense from an attack that involved deadly force. Furthermore, Homicides may be "excusable." Excusable Homicides" could occur if the suspect was an actual and continuous victim of repeated domestic battery and killed their spouse out of a perceived threat of real and serious danger against them by their spouse. This is known as "Battered Spouse Syndrome." Another form of "Excusable Homicide" is when the suspect is legally insane. This occurs when the accused suffers from a mental illness that causes them to not appreciate the consequences of their action and not know the difference between right and wrong when the act occurs.
Misidentification of the defendant is far more common than most people realize. It has been reported and studied that the least reliable type of evidence is eyewitness identification. It can be crucial to fully evaluate, investigate and question the validity and strength of any witness, especially that of an eyewitness. Scientific and forensic evidence has often become essential to both the prosecution and defense of homicide cases. DNA testing, blood splattering, accident/incident reconstruction, entomology, ballistic testing, fingerprint analysis and decomposition studies are but a few of the areas in which I have been called upon to address and defend against a homicide charge.
Drunk Driving Defense
I would like you to imagine for a moment that you’ve gone to a friend’s house for dinner. In the course of a very good dinner you’ve had a couple of glasses of a good Merlot and it is now time to drive home. I would like you to imagine that you are on your way home–and, I will tell you, by the way, that two glasses of wine will not, in any state, put you under the influence of alcohol or over the legal limit of .08. As you are driving along the highway, you see ahead of you some flashing lights and barricades and police cars closed off the highway, with flashing lights directing you into an increasingly small channel. And, as you go in, you are stopped and two police officers approach you and stick a flashlight in your face and say, "Breath on me. Have you been drinking tonight? Please step out of the car." After doing some gymnastics at the side of the road you find yourself in jail charged with operating while under the influence of an intoxicant and driving with a prohibited blood alcohol level.
You may think that is not enough to get someone convicted of a drunk driving in America where someone is supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Unfortunately that is not true. A judge once remarked that all a prosecutor has to do to win a DWI case is just make sure that the three letters “DWI” are mentioned at least 15 times in a trial. It is this type of environment that has allowed history to repeat itself. All we have to do is look back to the Salem Witch Hunt trials of 1692 where 19 convicted “witches” lost their lives on “specter” evidence. Evidence in DWI trials has not come very far since 1692 when claims of apparitions only visible to their victims were enough to support execution of the accused. The greatest challenge to DWI practitioners these days and to those accused of DWI/DUI related crimes is that courtrooms have not kept pace with the science. Bad science is rubberstamped with approval by the majority of the judiciary as long as the government sponsors it.
If you've been arrested for a OWI DUI in Wisconsin and you don't think it's fair, you need attorney Paul A. Ksicinski to protect your rights, make sure you're treated fairly and who knows how to get results. I understand that you may be feeling confused, angry, or somewhat fearful about what's happened to you. The process of being arrested, taken to jail, fingerprinted, and photographed can be dehumanizing. A drunk driving arrest does not mean that you are a bad person. In fact, our clients are decent, hardworking, intelligent and creative people – people with good families who need them. (I use the term “DUI” because it is the most commonly used term in America. In Wisconsin, the more commonly used term is “OWI.” For our purposes, these are the same).
Thatʼs one of the reasons why I am proud to be your drunk driving defense lawyer. When it seems as though the weight of the world is on your shoulders, I am honored to be the one who has your back. Prosecutors often seek the most severe penalties possible in these cases and are reluctant to negotiate with defendants. If you are charged with a drunk driving in Wisconsin, therefore, you should not hesitate to contact an attorney who has 23 years of experience defending drunk driving cases, Paul Ksicinski. I can explain your options and advise you on how to protect your rights as a criminal defendant. If I represent you, I will spare no energy in casting doubt on any vulnerable areas of the prosecution’s case.
Defense of drug charges
Drug crimes are taken very seriously by prosecutors despite society growing tired of the government’s war on crime. A national survey by the Pew Research Center finds that 67% of Americans say that the government should focus more on providing treatment for those who use illegal drugs such as heroin and cocaine. Just 26% think the government’s focus should be on prosecuting users of such hard drugs. Support for a treatment-based approach to illegal drug use spans nearly all demographic groups. And while Republicans are less supportive of the treatment option than are Democrats or independents, about half of Republicans (51%) say the government should focus more on treatment than prosecution in dealing with illegal drug users.
Prosecuting attorneys aggressively charge people facing drug cases, including situations when a defendant may have had only a small trace amount of marijuana. This is true despite a recent statewide poll by the Marquette University Law School showing that roughly half of Wisconsin’s registered voters support full legalization of the drug. Specifically, 49.7 percent supported legalization, 44.9 percent opposed and 4.7 percent didn’t know.
Prosecutors often seek the most severe penalties possible in these cases and are reluctant to negotiate with defendants. If you are charged with a drug crime in Wisconsin, therefore, you should not hesitate to contact an attorney with 23 years experience defending drug charges, Paul Ksicinski. I can explain your options and advise you on how to protect your rights as a criminal defendant. If I represent you, I will spare no energy in casting doubt on any vulnerable areas of the prosecution’s case.
Importantly, however, African Americans and whites use illegal drugs at approximately the same rates, yet both arrest and sentencing tends to be stricter for African Americans according to a study conducted by the Justice Policy Institute. Black people are 10 times more likely to be imprisoned for drug offenses than white people in the United States. The institute said that selective policing is partly to blame for the disparity, with police departments devoting more resources to arresting purchasers and buyers in inner-city, open-air markets rather than in the suburbs, and college campuses where fewer blacks live. In addition, research has found that probation officers tend to be more sympathetic to white offenders than to black offenders. Officers have been found to be more likely to attribute white people's crimes to their circumstances, and black people's to moral failings
Common Drug Charges and Punishments
Crimes involving controlled substances most often involve possession, possession with intent to sell, and selling. While some first offenses are classified as misdemeanors, many drug crimes are charged as serious felony offenses. Any second offense involving drugs will be classified as a felony, even if it would have been a misdemeanor as a first offense.
Both state and federal law classify controlled substances into one of five schedules. Schedule I drugs are those considered highly addictive and have no currently accepted medical use; Schedule I drugs include as heroin, LSD, and PCP. Schedule II drugs have high potential for abuse and do have medical uses; these include opium, codeine, morphine, cocaine, methadone, and amphetamines. Schedule III, IV and V substances include drugs with lower potential for abuse and for which there is a currently accepted medical use.
Drug crimes carry especially significant consequences because they can result in charges at both state and federal levels. This means that someone can be sentenced to separate penalties for the same offense. While some sentences are served concurrently, others are served sequentially so that one sentence starts after the previous sentence ends.
Moreover, the penalties faced by drug offense defendants in Wisconsin are very severe. Sadly, three out of four (77.5%) drug offenders sent to prison have never been convicted of a violent felony and one in three (31.8%) has no prior felony convictions for any crime. These penalties will vary according to the specific variety of drug and how much of the drug was involved in the offense. State and federal laws assign harsher punishments to individuals convicted of crimes related to controlled substances that are believed to have a highly addictive effect. When large amounts of a drug are tied to a person, a longer prison sentence likely will be imposed.
Protecting the Rights of People Charged With Drug Offenses
There are many potential arguments that a drug defense lawyer can explore. For example, the evidence on which the prosecution relies may have been seized in an illegal search, executed without a warrant or other valid justification. If this argument can be made, you will need Paul Ksicinski on your side to challenge the illegally seized evidence when the prosecution tries to present it.
Arrested For Possession w/Intent in Wisconsin?
Get a Top Criminal Defense Lawyer
Possession of a controlled substance with intent to manufacture, distribute or deliver (drug possession) is an extremely serious crime under Wisconsin law. It is felony charge for which you face significant jail time if found guilty. You will need strong legal representation, experienced in defending this kinds of drug cases, to determine what grounds you may have to fight the charges against you.
But I want you to know that I can help, and that there are things we can do to fight back.
According to Wisconsin drug laws, the elements of possession with intent to manufacture, distribute or deliver are:
1. the defendant possessed a substance;
2. the substance in question was (Marijuana / Cocaine / Heroin / LSD / methamphetamine / etc) ;
3. the defendant knew or believed that the substance was marijuana / cocaine / heroin / LSD / methamphetamine /etc.
4. the defendant intended to manufacture, distribute or deliver marijuana
The most likely penalty for a first or second offense marijuana possession charge would be a fine of a few hundred dollars, or time served if the person was in custody for a few days or so.
Keeping A Drug House – Wisconsin Penalties
There are two different criminal charges of Keeping a Drug House in Wisconsin. They are Misdemeanor charges. The elements of each crime are:
WISCONSIN KEEPING A DRUG HOUSE FOR USE OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES (MISDEMEANOR)
• That a person kept or maintained a structure or place
• That the place was resorted to by persons using controlled substances in violation of Chapter 961 for the purpose of using controlled substances
• That the defendant kept such a place knowingly
The maximum penalty for keeping a drug house is one year jail and a $25,000.00 fine
WISCONSIN KEEPING A DRUG HOUSE FOR MANUFACTURING, KEEPING, OR DELIVERING CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES (MISDEMEANOR)
• That a person kept or maintained a structure or place
• That the place was used for manufacturing, keeping or delivering a controlled substance
• That the defendant kept such a place knowingly
The maximum penalty for keeping a drug house for manufacturing, keeping or delivering a controlled substance is one year jail and a $25,000.00 fine
These crimes are often charged in conjunction with other drug charges like intent to distribute or simple possession. Either way, they are charges that should be taking seriously by your defense attorney.
Wisconsin Defense Strategies – Intent to Distribute & Manufacture
There are many different strong defenses to fight an intent to distribute or manufacture drugs I’ve used, to successfully beat these charges.
An intent to distribute, drug selling or dealing defense usually involves challenging the search and seizure of the substance. The arresting officers must have probable cause for the search, whether it is your home, car or person. Without probable cause, your rights under both the US Constitution and the laws of Wisconsin have been violated, which would make the evidence inadmissible in court.
Often the police will charge you with the much more serious Possession with Intent to Distribute charge not based on actually selling or distributing, but simply because of the quantity of the drugs, or how it is packaged. They may bring in other officers as experts to claim intent, but I will challenge those experts claims, and offer alternative theories as to why the drugs may have been packaged in the manner claimed, and the drugs were really for personal use.
I will argue that the facts of the case don’t justify a such serious charge, and it should be reduced to simple possession. Getting an intent to distribute or deliver charge reduced is a first step in protecting you from the harshest penalties.
With such a serious and legally complicated charge, it’s hard to make any general claims or conclusions. I’ll need to study your case closely, and I’ll look for any police mistakes or constitutional issues with which to fight back. But please, call me right away for a consultation. Even if you don’t want to hire me, you need to know that the quicker an attorney starts working on a case, the more defense options you will have.
Driver License Suspensions on Drug Convictions
Section 961.50 of the Wisconsin statutes used to include a mandatory driver’s license suspension for all drug convictions under chapter 961. This provided for a minimum 6 month driver’s license suspension even for offenses like possession of drug paraphernalia or simple possession of a small amount of marijuana. That law was changed recently so that the driver’s license suspension is no longer mandatory. Section 961.50(1) now provides as follows:
If a person is convicted of any violation of this chapter, the court may, in addition to any other penalties that may apply to the crime, suspend the person’s operating privilege, as defined in s. 340.01(40), for not less than 6 months nor more than 5 years.
I never understood the connection between a minor drug offense and a driver’s license suspension. It was often treated as more or less an add-on punishment in plea negotiations and argued sentences, along the lines of “Oh yeah, and there is the six month driver’s license suspension as well.” This should no longer be the case now that the suspension is discretionary.
If you’ve been arrested on any drug charge in Wisconsin, call me for a consultation. Defending people just like you is what I do everyday. I’ll lay out your options, the penalties you are facing, and offer some recommendations of what to do about it. There’s no charge for my initial advice, so you have nothing to lose. Call me to get my take on your case.
Dedicated Domestic Violence Defense Attorney Serving Wisconsin
No rational person condones violence toward anyone, particularly a family member or intimate partner. In America there are many tragic domestic relationships that involve battered men, women, and children. A true victim in a violent intimate relationship needs immediate support and protection. A true batterer needs to face the legal consequences of their actions.
But the term "batterer" is commonly misused in domestic violence debates. Battering does not refer to an argument without the intentional infliction of bodily harm, nor does it mean the occasional arguments that many couples have that may grow to yelling at each other.
With "Zero Tolerance" arrest policies and "No Drop" prosecutions, the number of arrests for petty family arguments has skyrocketed. A former prosecuting attorney explains the phenomena:
"Christopher Pagan, who was until recently a prosecutor in Hamilton County, Ohio, estimates that due to a 1994 state law requiring police on a domestic call either to make an arrest or to file a report explaining why a no arrest was made, "domestics " went from 10 percent to 40 percent of his docket. But, he suggests, that doesn't mean actual abusers were coming to his attention more often. "We started getting a lot of push-and-shoves," says Pagan, "or even yelling matches. " In the past, police officers would intervene and separate the parties to let them cool off. Now those cases end up in criminal courts. It's exacerbating tensions between the parties, and it's turning law-abiding middle class citizens into criminals." Cathy Young, Domestic Violations, Reason Magazine, April 1998
If you are accused of this crime, you should seek the advice of a Paul Ksicinski since he is skilled at defending domestic abuse cases in Wisconsin. A conviction can carry serious penalties that can affect the rest of your life. Attorney Paul Ksicinski has served as a public defender for 23 years and received the Wisconsin Public Defender Performance Recognition Award for his service to his clients accused of domestic violence offenses. If you are charged with domestic violence, Mr. Ksicinski can help you protect your reputation and your freedom.
Domestic Abuse and Restraining Orders
A police officer is often required to take into custody anyone whom the officer reasonably believes has committed this crime in situations such as when continued abuse is likely or the victim has suffered physical injuries. In fact, mandatory domestic violence arrest policies may actually increase the incidence of violence in some women's lives. Lawrence W. Sherman, Policing Domestic Violence: Experiments and Dilemmas 3 (1992); Barbara Hart, Battered Women and the Criminal Justice System, 36 AM. BEHAV. SCIENTIST 624, 626 (1993). In 1992, Lawrence Sherman conducted a study in the City of Milwaukee on the effects of arrest on batterers. Lawrence W. Sherman, Janell D. Schmidt, Dennis P. Rogan, Douglas A. Smith, Patrick R. Gartin, Ellen G. Cohn, Dean J. Collins & Anthony R. Bacich, The Variable Effects of Arrest on Criminal Careers: The Milwaukee Domestic Violence Experiment, 83 J. CRIM. L. & CRIMINOLOGY 137 (1992). The study design recognized three possible interventions: full arrest, short arrest, and no arrest (with a warning if police were called back). Id., at 147. Sherman found that full or short arrest had a short term deterrent effect. Id., at 152 53. However, over the long term there was a trend that violence increased in cases in which the perpetrator had been arrested. The frequency of repeat violence increased when the persons arrested were unemployed, unmarried, high school dropouts or African American. Id., at 158 63.
Violence decreased when the persons arrested were employed, married, and white. Sherman concluded that when Milwaukee police arrest 10,000 African American men, they produce 1803 more acts of domestic violence primarily against African American women in any given year than in cases in which the African American men are warned and not arrested. When, on the other hand, Milwaukee police arrest 10,000 white men, they produce 2504 fewer acts of domestic violence against white women when compared to cases in which the white men are warned. Sherman surmised that if three times as many African Americans as whites are arrested in Milwaukee (which would be typical given police practices in that city), a mandatory arrest policy would prevent 2504 acts of violence primarily against white women, at the price of 5409 acts of violence primarily against African American women. Sherman concluded, based on this study, that mandatory arrest policies are highly problematic. Sherman et al., at 139. Mandatory arrest is not a good policy when other options exist
A related crime is the violation of a restraining order. These orders, which are also called final injunctions, require one person to stay away from another person for up to four years. Victims of domestic violence often seek final injunctions and can receive temporary restraining orders while waiting for a hearing on a final injunction. For the purposes of a restraining order, domestic abuse extends beyond the criminal damage to include inflicting property damage. It also extends to a broader group of potential victims, including adult caregivers and people who are dating but not in a long-standing relationship.
No drop policies cause prosecutors to try domestic violence cases without the cooperation and/or testimony of the victim. Such cases often have insufficient evidence to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. In Wisconsin, no drop DV prosecutions should give one pause to wonder if alleged victims are really being treated with “courtesy and dignity” by courts and prosecutors as legislatively required when they recant and/or refuse to appear in court. See, Wis. Stat. § 950.01. Absent some good faith showing of improper influence upon the accuser or that the accuser is incompetent, the State should honor the request of the accuser to have a case dismissed when she recants. Merely because a domestic violence battery can be successfully prosecuted does not mean it should be prosecuted. After all, an ethical prosecutor is not a zealot attempting to tack as many skins of DV defendants as possible to the wall. Rather the ethical prosecutor is supposed to ensure a DV defendant has a fair trial and refrain from improper prosecutions that are calculated to produce a wrongful conviction. Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78, 88(1935).
Violating the no-contact requirement after an arrest for domestic abuse can lead to a penalty of up to nine months in jail and a fine of up to $10,000. A person who violates a temporary restraining order may face a penalty of up to nine months in jail and a fine of up to $1,000.
Incidents of domestic violence are punished as the crimes of which they consist. For example, someone arrested for domestic abuse may be convicted of battery, sexual assault, sexual abuse, intimidation, trespass, or harassment, among other crimes. Beyond the penalties for those crimes, a defendant involved in a domestic violence incident must pay a special fee of $100.
More importantly, a repeat domestic abuser may have their jail or prison sentences for the underlying crime extended by up to two years. A repeat domestic abuser is someone who either:
• Commits an act of domestic abuse within 72 hours of being arrested for a domestic abuse incident; or
• Has been previously convicted within the last 10 years of two crimes for which the court could impose the special domestic violence fee.
Facing Charges of Wisconsin Domestic Abuse Requires Legal Counsel
Beyond the specific penalties associated with this offense, a conviction of domestic violence can have significant long-term effects on your life. As a criminal defendant, you have a wide range of rights available to protect you from prosecution if you have been unjustly charged. The knowledgeable Wisconsin domestic violence defense attorney Paul Ksicinski have accumulated years of experience defending ordinary people mistakenly accused of harming or trying to harm other people in their lives. You may not be aware of all your options, but we are available to discuss the details of your specific case and develop a legal strategy for you. Contact Paul at (414) 530-5214 or through the online form at this website to set up an initial consultation at no cost.
Get a Top Criminal Defense Lawyer
Possession of a controlled substance with intent to manufacture, distribute or deliver (drug possession) is an extremely serious crime under Wisconsin law. It is felony charge for which you face significant jail time if found guilty. You will need strong legal representation, experienced in defending this kinds of drug cases, to determine what grounds you may have to fight the charges against you.
But I want you to know that I can help, and that there are things we can do to fight back.
According to Wisconsin drug laws, the elements of possession with intent to manufacture, distribute or deliver are:
1. the defendant possessed a substance;
2. the substance in question was (Marijuana / Cocaine / Heroin / LSD / methamphetamine / etc) ;
3. the defendant knew or believed that the substance was marijuana / cocaine / heroin / LSD / methamphetamine /etc.
4. the defendant intended to manufacture, distribute or deliver marijuana
The most likely penalty for a first or second offense marijuana possession charge would be a fine of a few hundred dollars, or time served if the person was in custody for a few days or so.
Keeping A Drug House – Wisconsin Penalties
There are two different criminal charges of Keeping a Drug House in Wisconsin. They are Misdemeanor charges. The elements of each crime are:
WISCONSIN KEEPING A DRUG HOUSE FOR USE OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES (MISDEMEANOR)
• That a person kept or maintained a structure or place
• That the place was resorted to by persons using controlled substances in violation of Chapter 961 for the purpose of using controlled substances
• That the defendant kept such a place knowingly
The maximum penalty for keeping a drug house is one year jail and a $25,000.00 fine
WISCONSIN KEEPING A DRUG HOUSE FOR MANUFACTURING, KEEPING, OR DELIVERING CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES (MISDEMEANOR)
• That a person kept or maintained a structure or place
• That the place was used for manufacturing, keeping or delivering a controlled substance
• That the defendant kept such a place knowingly
The maximum penalty for keeping a drug house for manufacturing, keeping or delivering a controlled substance is one year jail and a $25,000.00 fine
These crimes are often charged in conjunction with other drug charges like intent to distribute or simple possession. Either way, they are charges that should be taking seriously by your defense attorney.
Wisconsin Defense Strategies – Intent to Distribute & Manufacture
There are many different strong defenses to fight an intent to distribute or manufacture drugs I’ve used, to successfully beat these charges.
An intent to distribute, drug selling or dealing defense usually involves challenging the search and seizure of the substance. The arresting officers must have probable cause for the search, whether it is your home, car or person. Without probable cause, your rights under both the US Constitution and the laws of Wisconsin have been violated, which would make the evidence inadmissible in court.
Often the police will charge you with the much more serious Possession with Intent to Distribute charge not based on actually selling or distributing, but simply because of the quantity of the drugs, or how it is packaged. They may bring in other officers as experts to claim intent, but I will challenge those experts claims, and offer alternative theories as to why the drugs may have been packaged in the manner claimed, and the drugs were really for personal use.
I will argue that the facts of the case don’t justify a such serious charge, and it should be reduced to simple possession. Getting an intent to distribute or deliver charge reduced is a first step in protecting you from the harshest penalties.
With such a serious and legally complicated charge, it’s hard to make any general claims or conclusions. I’ll need to study your case closely, and I’ll look for any police mistakes or constitutional issues with which to fight back. But please, call me right away for a consultation. Even if you don’t want to hire me, you need to know that the quicker an attorney starts working on a case, the more defense options you will have.
Driver License Suspensions on Drug Convictions
Section 961.50 of the Wisconsin statutes used to include a mandatory driver’s license suspension for all drug convictions under chapter 961. This provided for a minimum 6 month driver’s license suspension even for offenses like possession of drug paraphernalia or simple possession of a small amount of marijuana. That law was changed recently so that the driver’s license suspension is no longer mandatory. Section 961.50(1) now provides as follows:
If a person is convicted of any violation of this chapter, the court may, in addition to any other penalties that may apply to the crime, suspend the person’s operating privilege, as defined in s. 340.01(40), for not less than 6 months nor more than 5 years.
I never understood the connection between a minor drug offense and a driver’s license suspension. It was often treated as more or less an add-on punishment in plea negotiations and argued sentences, along the lines of “Oh yeah, and there is the six month driver’s license suspension as well.” This should no longer be the case now that the suspension is discretionary.
If you’ve been arrested on any drug charge in Wisconsin, call me for a consultation. Defending people just like you is what I do everyday. I’ll lay out your options, the penalties you are facing, and offer some recommendations of what to do about it. There’s no charge for my initial advice, so you have nothing to lose. Call me to get my take on your case.
Dedicated Domestic Violence Defense Attorney Serving Wisconsin
No rational person condones violence toward anyone, particularly a family member or intimate partner. In America there are many tragic domestic relationships that involve battered men, women, and children. A true victim in a violent intimate relationship needs immediate support and protection. A true batterer needs to face the legal consequences of their actions.
But the term "batterer" is commonly misused in domestic violence debates. Battering does not refer to an argument without the intentional infliction of bodily harm, nor does it mean the occasional arguments that many couples have that may grow to yelling at each other.
With "Zero Tolerance" arrest policies and "No Drop" prosecutions, the number of arrests for petty family arguments has skyrocketed. A former prosecuting attorney explains the phenomena:
"Christopher Pagan, who was until recently a prosecutor in Hamilton County, Ohio, estimates that due to a 1994 state law requiring police on a domestic call either to make an arrest or to file a report explaining why a no arrest was made, "domestics " went from 10 percent to 40 percent of his docket. But, he suggests, that doesn't mean actual abusers were coming to his attention more often. "We started getting a lot of push-and-shoves," says Pagan, "or even yelling matches. " In the past, police officers would intervene and separate the parties to let them cool off. Now those cases end up in criminal courts. It's exacerbating tensions between the parties, and it's turning law-abiding middle class citizens into criminals." Cathy Young, Domestic Violations, Reason Magazine, April 1998
If you are accused of this crime, you should seek the advice of a Paul Ksicinski since he is skilled at defending domestic abuse cases in Wisconsin. A conviction can carry serious penalties that can affect the rest of your life. Attorney Paul Ksicinski has served as a public defender for 23 years and received the Wisconsin Public Defender Performance Recognition Award for his service to his clients accused of domestic violence offenses. If you are charged with domestic violence, Mr. Ksicinski can help you protect your reputation and your freedom.
Domestic Abuse and Restraining Orders
A police officer is often required to take into custody anyone whom the officer reasonably believes has committed this crime in situations such as when continued abuse is likely or the victim has suffered physical injuries. In fact, mandatory domestic violence arrest policies may actually increase the incidence of violence in some women's lives. Lawrence W. Sherman, Policing Domestic Violence: Experiments and Dilemmas 3 (1992); Barbara Hart, Battered Women and the Criminal Justice System, 36 AM. BEHAV. SCIENTIST 624, 626 (1993). In 1992, Lawrence Sherman conducted a study in the City of Milwaukee on the effects of arrest on batterers. Lawrence W. Sherman, Janell D. Schmidt, Dennis P. Rogan, Douglas A. Smith, Patrick R. Gartin, Ellen G. Cohn, Dean J. Collins & Anthony R. Bacich, The Variable Effects of Arrest on Criminal Careers: The Milwaukee Domestic Violence Experiment, 83 J. CRIM. L. & CRIMINOLOGY 137 (1992). The study design recognized three possible interventions: full arrest, short arrest, and no arrest (with a warning if police were called back). Id., at 147. Sherman found that full or short arrest had a short term deterrent effect. Id., at 152 53. However, over the long term there was a trend that violence increased in cases in which the perpetrator had been arrested. The frequency of repeat violence increased when the persons arrested were unemployed, unmarried, high school dropouts or African American. Id., at 158 63.
Violence decreased when the persons arrested were employed, married, and white. Sherman concluded that when Milwaukee police arrest 10,000 African American men, they produce 1803 more acts of domestic violence primarily against African American women in any given year than in cases in which the African American men are warned and not arrested. When, on the other hand, Milwaukee police arrest 10,000 white men, they produce 2504 fewer acts of domestic violence against white women when compared to cases in which the white men are warned. Sherman surmised that if three times as many African Americans as whites are arrested in Milwaukee (which would be typical given police practices in that city), a mandatory arrest policy would prevent 2504 acts of violence primarily against white women, at the price of 5409 acts of violence primarily against African American women. Sherman concluded, based on this study, that mandatory arrest policies are highly problematic. Sherman et al., at 139. Mandatory arrest is not a good policy when other options exist
A related crime is the violation of a restraining order. These orders, which are also called final injunctions, require one person to stay away from another person for up to four years. Victims of domestic violence often seek final injunctions and can receive temporary restraining orders while waiting for a hearing on a final injunction. For the purposes of a restraining order, domestic abuse extends beyond the criminal damage to include inflicting property damage. It also extends to a broader group of potential victims, including adult caregivers and people who are dating but not in a long-standing relationship.
No drop policies cause prosecutors to try domestic violence cases without the cooperation and/or testimony of the victim. Such cases often have insufficient evidence to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. In Wisconsin, no drop DV prosecutions should give one pause to wonder if alleged victims are really being treated with “courtesy and dignity” by courts and prosecutors as legislatively required when they recant and/or refuse to appear in court. See, Wis. Stat. § 950.01. Absent some good faith showing of improper influence upon the accuser or that the accuser is incompetent, the State should honor the request of the accuser to have a case dismissed when she recants. Merely because a domestic violence battery can be successfully prosecuted does not mean it should be prosecuted. After all, an ethical prosecutor is not a zealot attempting to tack as many skins of DV defendants as possible to the wall. Rather the ethical prosecutor is supposed to ensure a DV defendant has a fair trial and refrain from improper prosecutions that are calculated to produce a wrongful conviction. Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78, 88(1935).
Violating the no-contact requirement after an arrest for domestic abuse can lead to a penalty of up to nine months in jail and a fine of up to $10,000. A person who violates a temporary restraining order may face a penalty of up to nine months in jail and a fine of up to $1,000.
Incidents of domestic violence are punished as the crimes of which they consist. For example, someone arrested for domestic abuse may be convicted of battery, sexual assault, sexual abuse, intimidation, trespass, or harassment, among other crimes. Beyond the penalties for those crimes, a defendant involved in a domestic violence incident must pay a special fee of $100.
More importantly, a repeat domestic abuser may have their jail or prison sentences for the underlying crime extended by up to two years. A repeat domestic abuser is someone who either:
• Commits an act of domestic abuse within 72 hours of being arrested for a domestic abuse incident; or
• Has been previously convicted within the last 10 years of two crimes for which the court could impose the special domestic violence fee.
Facing Charges of Wisconsin Domestic Abuse Requires Legal Counsel
Beyond the specific penalties associated with this offense, a conviction of domestic violence can have significant long-term effects on your life. As a criminal defendant, you have a wide range of rights available to protect you from prosecution if you have been unjustly charged. The knowledgeable Wisconsin domestic violence defense attorney Paul Ksicinski have accumulated years of experience defending ordinary people mistakenly accused of harming or trying to harm other people in their lives. You may not be aware of all your options, but we are available to discuss the details of your specific case and develop a legal strategy for you. Contact Paul at (414) 530-5214 or through the online form at this website to set up an initial consultation at no cost.