Marathon County, WI DUI-DWI Lawyers, page 2


Bradley D. Myska

Traffic, Dispute Resolution, Estate, Employee Rights, Accident & Injury
Status:  In Good Standing           

Brian C. Williams

Criminal
Status:  In Good Standing           Licensed:  24 Years

Calvin R. Dexter

Trusts, Power of Attorney, Prenuptial Agreements
Status:  In Good Standing           Licensed:  41 Years

Christine R H Olsen

Government, Divorce, Divorce & Family Law, Business
Status:  In Good Standing           Licensed:  38 Years

Christine Bremer Muggli

Workers' Compensation, Employment, Medical Malpractice, Accident & Injury, Mass Torts
Status:  In Good Standing           

Dale M. Eaton

Pharmaceutical Product, Family Law, Banking & Finance, Medical Malpractice
Status:  In Good Standing           Licensed:  31 Years

Dana James Weis

Employment Discrimination, Products Liability, Personal Injury, Medical Malpractice
Status:  In Good Standing           

Daniel James Rupar

Transactions, Construction, Trusts, Prosecution
Status:  In Good Standing           Licensed:  36 Years

David J. Eckert

Real Estate, Estate Planning, Business
Status:  In Good Standing           Licensed:  36 Years

David Gardner Casey

Divorce & Family Law, Criminal
Status:  In Good Standing           Licensed:  15 Years

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-620-0900

Member Representative

Call me for fastest results!
800-620-0900

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-620-0900

By submitting this lawyer request, I confirm I have read and agree to the Consent to Receive Messages from all messaging and voice technologies including Email, Text, Phone, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy. Information provided is not privileged or confidential.


Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-943-8690

Member Representative

Call me for fastest results!
800-943-8690

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-943-8690

By submitting this lawyer request, I confirm I have read and agree to the Consent to Receive Messages from all messaging and voice technologies including Email, Text, Phone, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy. Information provided is not privileged or confidential.

TIPS

Easily find Wisconsin DUI-DWI Lawyers and Wisconsin DUI-DWI Law Firms for your location. Narrow your DUI-DWI attorney search for Wisconsin by major city or a specific Wisconsin city using the city list. Or search for Wisconsin DUI-DWI attorneys by county. For more attorneys, search all Criminal areas including Expungement, Felony, Misdemeanor, RICO Act, White Collar Crime, Traffic and Juvenile Law attorneys.

LEGAL TERMS

PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE

One of the most sacred principles in the American criminal justice system, holding that a defendant is innocent until proven guilty. In other words, the prosecu... (more...)
One of the most sacred principles in the American criminal justice system, holding that a defendant is innocent until proven guilty. In other words, the prosecution must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, each element of the crime charged.

INFORMED CONSENT

An agreement to do something or to allow something to happen, made with complete knowledge of all relevant facts, such as the risks involved or any available al... (more...)
An agreement to do something or to allow something to happen, made with complete knowledge of all relevant facts, such as the risks involved or any available alternatives. For example, a patient may give informed consent to medical treatment only after the healthcare professional has disclosed all possible risks involved in accepting or rejecting the treatment. A healthcare provider or facility may be held responsible for an injury caused by an undisclosed risk. In another context, a person accused of committing a crime cannot give up his constitutional rights--for example, to remain silent or to talk with an attorney--unless and until he has been informed of those rights, usually via the well-known Miranda warnings.

INADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE

Testimony or other evidence that fails to meet state or federal court rules governing the types of evidence that can be presented to a judge or jury. The main r... (more...)
Testimony or other evidence that fails to meet state or federal court rules governing the types of evidence that can be presented to a judge or jury. The main reason why evidence is ruled inadmissible is because it falls into a category deemed so unreliable that a court should not consider it as part of a deciding a case --for example, hearsay evidence, or an expert's opinion that is not based on facts generally accepted in the field. Evidence will also be declared inadmissible if it suffers from some other defect--for example, as compared to its value, it will take too long to present or risks enflaming the jury, as might be the case with graphic pictures of a homicide victim. In addition, in criminal cases, evidence that is gathered using illegal methods is commonly ruled inadmissible. Because the rules of evidence are so complicated (and because contesting lawyers waste so much time arguing over them) there is a strong trend towards using mediation or arbitration to resolve civil disputes. In mediation and arbitration, virtually all evidence can be considered. See evidence, admissible evidence.

SENTENCE

Punishment in a criminal case. A sentence can range from a fine and community service to life imprisonment or death. For most crimes, the sentence is chosen by ... (more...)
Punishment in a criminal case. A sentence can range from a fine and community service to life imprisonment or death. For most crimes, the sentence is chosen by the trial judge; the jury chooses the sentence only in a capital case, when it must choose between life in prison without parole and death.

BAILOR

Someone who delivers an item of personal property to another person for a specific purpose. For example, a person who leaves a broken VCR with a repairman in or... (more...)
Someone who delivers an item of personal property to another person for a specific purpose. For example, a person who leaves a broken VCR with a repairman in order to get it fixed would be a bailor.

ACTUS REUS

Latin for a 'guilty act.' The actus reus is the act which, in combination with a certain mental state, such as intent or recklessness, constitutes a crime. For ... (more...)
Latin for a 'guilty act.' The actus reus is the act which, in combination with a certain mental state, such as intent or recklessness, constitutes a crime. For example, the crime of theft requires physically taking something (the actus reus) coupled with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of the object (the mental state, or mens rea).

CONVICTION

A finding by a judge or jury that the defendant is guilty of a crime.

CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Evidence that proves a fact by means of an inference. For example, from the evidence that a person was seen running away from the scene of a crime, a judge or j... (more...)
Evidence that proves a fact by means of an inference. For example, from the evidence that a person was seen running away from the scene of a crime, a judge or jury may infer that the person committed the crime.

HABEAS CORPUS

Latin for 'You have the body.' A prisoner files a petition for writ of habeas corpus in order to challenge the authority of the prison or jail warden to continu... (more...)
Latin for 'You have the body.' A prisoner files a petition for writ of habeas corpus in order to challenge the authority of the prison or jail warden to continue to hold him. If the judge orders a hearing after reading the writ, the prisoner gets to argue that his confinement is illegal. These writs are frequently filed by convicted prisoners who challenge their conviction on the grounds that the trial attorney failed to prepare the defense and was incompetent. Prisoners sentenced to death also file habeas petitions challenging the constitutionality of the state death penalty law. Habeas writs are different from and do not replace appeals, which are arguments for reversal of a conviction based on claims that the judge conducted the trial improperly. Often, convicted prisoners file both.

SAMPLE LEGAL CASES

State v. Carter

... Id. at 100. In rejecting the plaintiff's challenge, the court clarified that a summary suspension under the "zero tolerance" law is not a summary suspension under DUI law, and therefore "[p]laintiff's reliance on DUI law is puzzling because plaintiff was not arrested for DUI." Id. ...

State v. Carter

... Id. at 100. In rejecting the plaintiff's challenge, the court clarified that a summary suspension under the "zero tolerance" law is not a summary suspension under DUI law, and therefore "[p]laintiff's reliance on DUI law is puzzling because plaintiff was not arrested for DUI." Id. ...

State v. MALSBURY

... The State counters that because Malsbury's Washington conviction was originally charged as driving under the influence (DUI) and later amended to reckless driving with OWI-like penalties, the conviction counts for purposes of Wisconsin's OWI laws. ...