Eau Claire Criminal Defense Blog

The state may seek to involuntarily commit a prisoner who has a mental illness that needs treatment. But can the state also medicate an inmate against their will without proving that the inmate poses a danger to themselves or others? Why Would the State Seek to Involuntarily Medicate a Criminal Defendant or an Inmate? The government might file a motion to obtain court approval to involuntarily medicate a criminal defendant or a prison inmate for several reasons, such as: Restoring a criminal defendant to competency: A trial court may deem a defendant not competent to stand trial if they have a mental illness that prevents them from appreciating the nature of court proceedings or assisting their defense attorney with preparing and presenting a defense. The government may request to involuntarily medicate the defendant if medication would treat the symptoms of their mental illness and restore them to competency to stand trial. A detainee or inmate poses a danger to themselves or others: A pretrial detainee’s or prison inmate’s mental illness might make them violent or suicidal and pose a risk of injury to themselves, other inmates, or correctional facility staff. A detainee's or inmate's mental illness has resulted in their involuntary commitment: The state may seek an order authorizing involuntary medication when such medication would help treat a detainee's or prisoner's mental illness that resulted in their involuntary commitment. Can the Court Order Involuntary Medication Without Finding a Defendant or Inmate Dangerous? Any patient, including a pretrial detainee or a prisoner, has the right to refuse medication or medical treatment, except when a court orders the involuntary administration of medication or treatment or when necessary to prevent severe physical harm to the patient or others. A court can order involuntary medication for an individual the court finds not competent to make an informed decision to refuse treatment. Courts can involuntarily commit both inmates and non-inmates when the state proves that an individual has a mental illness and needs treatment. However, while the law also requires the state to prove dangerousness to secure a non-inmate's involuntary commitment, the state does not have to prove dangerousness for an inmate. The Wisconsin Supreme Court evaluated the constitutionality of the state’s involuntary medication statute, which permitted the involuntary medication of an involuntarily committed person based on that person’s incompetence to refuse medication. The supreme court noted that while involuntary commitment of a non-inmate required a finding of dangerousness, that requirement did not apply to involuntarily committed inmates. Thus, the supreme court found the statute unconstitutional because the state did not have an overriding legitimate interest in involuntarily medicating someone whom a court has not deemed a danger to themselves or others. Contact a Criminal Defense Attorney Today If the government has filed a motion to medicate you during your pretrial detention or incarceration involuntarily, you need dedicated legal representation to defend your rights. Call Cohen Law Offices today at (715) 333-3782 for a confidential consultation with a seasoned criminal defense attorney to discuss your legal options.

When facing criminal sentencing, a defendant may wonder what factors the trial court will consider in deciding the sentence. In particular, can the court consider sentences imposed in similar cases when deciding a defendant's sentence? Statutory Factors That Courts Consider During Sentencing In Wisconsin, courts must consider three primary factors in exercising their sentencing discretion: the gravity of the offense, the defendant’s character and rehabilitative needs, and the need for protection of the public. In considering those three factors, courts may also evaluate other circumstances, such as: Whether the crime involved vicious or aggravated conduct The defendant’s criminal record Whether the defendant has a history of undesirable behavior The defendant’s personality, character, and social traits The results of the defendant’s pre-sentence investigation The degree of the defendant’s culpability The defendant’s demeanor or behavior at trial The defendant’s age, education, and employment history Whether the defendant has demonstrated genuine remorse for their crime The defendant’s cooperation with law enforcement and prosecutors The length of the defendant’s pre-trial detention The defendant’s need for rehabilitative control The rights of the public Sentencing Guidelines Wisconsin law establishes guidelines for the length of sentences that state courts can impose for a criminal conviction. For felonies, courts typically must impose a term of imprisonment of at least one year, with the maximum permissible prison term depending on the class of felony. However, the legislature has set different minimum and maximum prison terms for specific crimes. Sentencing maximums may also increase due to aggravating factors, such as repeat offenses, domestic abuse offenses, offenses against vulnerable adults, hate crimes, violent crimes in school zones, or crimes involving offenses. The law also requires courts to impose a term of extended supervision, which must last for at least 25 percent of the length of the prison term. Can Courts Refer to Other Cases in Fashioning a Sentence? In a recent case, a criminal defendant challenged the trial court's decision to consult files from comparable criminal cases in determining the defendant's sentence. The Wisconsin Supreme Court concluded that using such information did not violate the defendant's due process rights, noting that due process merely guaranteed that a trial court would sentence a defendant based on reliable information and would disclose the reasons for and objectives of the sentence. The supreme court held that a sentencing court could conduct a broad inquiry in determining a defendant's sentence, including considering the sentences imposed in other cases since referring to such information would promote the policy goal of consistency and uniformity in sentencing. The supreme court further held that sentencing courts were not obligated to provide parties with advance notice that the court would refer to the sentencing details of other cases, regardless of whether the trial judge merely referred to their own memories or read files. Contact a Criminal Defense Attorney Today Having experienced legal representation can help you obtain a favorable outcome during sentencing. Call Cohen Law Offices today at (715) 514-5051 for a consultation with a knowledgeable Wisconsin criminal defense lawyer about the sentencing process and to learn what factors courts use to determine a sentence.

In some criminal cases, disputes arise over the admissibility of an out-of-court identification that a witness made using social media photos or videos of the defendant. The Wisconsin Supreme Court recently clarified the standards trial courts should use in ruling on the admissibility of such identifications. The Rise of Social Media in Criminal Prosecutions Traditionally, law enforcement officers have relied on "mugshot" photos of criminal suspects to show to eyewitnesses to identify the perpetrator of a crime under investigation. However, investigators and prosecutors have increasingly relied on social media photos of criminal suspects as part of identification efforts. Officers can have eyewitnesses identify criminal suspects through a photo array, where police show a witness multiple photographs of similar-looking individuals and ask if the witness can identify any of the photos as the perpetrator. Alternatively, officers may use a single-photo identification method, showing a witness a single photograph of an individual and asking them if the person in the photo committed the crime. Both identification methods suffer from inherent suggestibility. However, other circumstances can enhance the reliability of a witness's identification, such as the witness's opportunity to view the suspect, the time between the crime and the identification, and the witness's certainty in their identification. Protecting Your Privacy on Social Media Today, law enforcement frequently uses social media photos of criminal suspects as part of their investigation and subsequent prosecution. Officers may use social media photos or videos to facilitate eyewitness identification. Prosecutors might submit a defendant’s social media photos or videos into evidence at trial, such as a photo of the defendant holding the same model of firearm used in a crime. People can take steps to protect their privacy on social media, including using each platform's privacy settings to limit access to their profile and posts to friends and family. Individuals should also exercise caution when receiving connection requests from people they do not know, as that request may have come from an investigator trying to access their profile. The Admissibility of a Social Media Identification The Wisconsin Supreme Court recently decided a case involving the admissibility of witness identification testimony based on an out-of-court identification using a single photo of the defendant from Facebook. The court affirmed the long-standing principle that a trial court can admit an identification made from a single social media photograph if the facts support the reliability of the identification. While the supreme court acknowledged the suggestibility of using a single photograph, social media photos tend to be less suggestive than mugshots, which weighs in favor of admitting into evidence an identification made using a social media photo. Contact a Criminal Defense Lawyer Today When facing a criminal prosecution where identity has become one of the critical issues, you need experienced legal counsel to protect your rights against improper identification or inadmissible evidence. Call Cohen Law Offices today at (715) 514-5051 for a confidential case evaluation to discuss how an Eau Claire criminal defense attorney can help you prepare a compelling defense strategy.

Under the Fourth Amendment, you have legal protections against searches, seizure of property, and arrest by law enforcement officers or government officials, including a requirement for officers to obtain warrants. However, police can conduct warrantless searches and seizures under specific circumstances. Your Protections Under the Fourth Amendment The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution grants citizens two critical rights. These rights include the privilege against unreasonable searches and seizures by government officials and the requirement that courts must find probable cause, supported by the affidavit of law enforcement, to issue a warrant describing the place(s) to search and the items or persons that law enforcement will seize. The Warrant Requirement The Fourth Amendment typically requires law enforcement and government agents to apply for a warrant before searching or arresting someone. To obtain a warrant, the police must provide sufficient facts and evidence to convince a judge that probable cause exists to support a search or arrest. The warrant requirement ensures that a neutral judicial officer, rather than a law enforcement officer engaged in investigating crime, determines that probable cause exists to intrude upon a person's privacy and freedom with a search or seizure. Exceptions Authorizing Warrantless Searches and Seizures However, courts have recognized that not every search and seizure requires law enforcement to apply for a warrant. Various legal exceptions permit warrantless searches. Some of the most common examples of these exceptions include: Consent search: Police do not need a warrant to search a container, vehicle, or home if they obtain consent to a search from the owner or an adult lawfully residing in the home. Plain view: When officers notice contraband or apparent evidence of criminal activity in plain view in a vehicle or home while the officer stands at a lawful place (such as outside a motorist’s car window or from the public sidewalk adjacent to a residence), they may have probable cause to search the vehicle or home. Search incident to arrest: After police arrest someone, they can search that individual to secure items, such as evidence the individual may attempt to destroy or weapons the individual might use to harm officers or facilitate an escape. Community caretaker doctrine: Officers can perform public functions other than their criminal investigation and law enforcement roles, such as rendering first aid, providing counseling, or ensuring public safety. Any searches or seizures that occur while the police are acting outside their law enforcement function may not run afoul of the limitations of the Fourth Amendment. Vehicle exception: Officers may search vehicles without a warrant if they have probable cause to believe a vehicle may contain contraband or evidence of a crime because the mobile nature of a vehicle means such evidence may disappear or get destroyed before the police can secure a warrant. Stop and frisk: The police can briefly detain a person they reasonably suspect has engaged in criminal conduct to question the individual or perform a brief investigation. Officers may pat down or frisk the individual to check for weapons that may pose a threat to the officers’ safety. Contact a Criminal Defense Attorney Today When the police have subjected you to an unreasonable warrantless search and seizure, you have options for vindicating your Fourth Amendment rights. Call Cohen Law Offices today at (715) 514-5051 for a confidential consultation with an experienced Wisconsin criminal defense lawyer to discuss your charges and learn more about your rights under the criminal justice system.

Read this article to learn how expungement in Wisconsin can offer a fresh start, impacting your future positively. Learn more with Cohen Law Offices.

There are many reasons why you may consider a plea agreement. If you fight the charges and you are found guilty, you may receive a stiffer sentence after a conviction. Your agreement is to plead guilty, either in exchange for lesser charges or the recommendation of a lesser sentence. Prosecutors can make a recommendation, but they cannot actually impose a jail sentence. That job falls solely to the judge. The court would need to review the plea agreement between you and the prosecutor. All the prosecutor does is make a sentencing recommendation to the judge. The court is not bound by the terms of the plea deal. The judge still has discretion when it comes to imposing a sentence. Once you have reached a plea bargain, the judge may hold a hearing in court. The judge wants to know that you understand the ramifications of a guilty plea and that you have full awareness of what you are doing. The judge wants to know that you are pleading guilty of your own volition and are not forced to do so. The Judge Ultimately Determines the Length of the Sentence Then, the judge would hold a sentencing hearing to review the prosecutor’s recommendation. In many cases, the judge would accept the prosecutor’s recommendation and sentence you in accordance with the terms of your plea deal. However, the judge may also want to hear from you and from the alleged victim. The judge may consider things such as the impact on the victim and the level of remorse. There are times when the judge may decide to give a sentence that is higher than the recommendation. They are entitled to rely on their own opinion of the gravity of the offenses and whether the proposed jail sentence is an adequate punishment. In some cases, the judge may give a stiffer sentence when they think that a defendant has gotten a “sweetheart deal.” While a judge has the right to impose a higher sentence, it certainly does not happen all the time. Nonetheless, you need to be aware of the fact that your fate is still out of your hands, even when you think that you have negotiated for more certainty. Thus, it is crucial to keep getting legal help through the end of the criminal justice process. An attorney could negotiate the best possible plea deal for you, but it is not the end of the story. Your attorney needs to fight for your rights all the way through the sentencing procedure. There is still a story that you need to tell right up to the moment that the judge imposes a sentence. Call an Eau Claire Criminal Defense Attorney The attorneys at the Cohen Law Offices will provide you with a vigorous legal defense that is aimed at obtaining the best possible result for you. To speak with a lawyer, you can message us online or call us today at 715-382-9447 .

Domestic violence cases can be incredibly complex and emotionally charged. If you are facing domestic violence charges, it is important to understand the available defenses and how they can impact your case. In this blog post, we will explore some of the defense options you may have and why hiring a skilled attorney is crucial to protecting your rights. What is Domestic Violence? Before discussing the defenses, it is important to have a clear understanding of what domestic violence entails. Domestic violence refers to abusive behavior, both physical and emotional, within a domestic or family relationship. This can include violence or threats of violence against a: Spouse Partner Child Roommate Parent Other family member What are the Penalties for Domestic Violence? The penalties for domestic violence vary depending on the circumstances and the severity of the offense. In Wisconsin, the penalties can range from fines and probation to imprisonment. Additionally, a conviction can have long-lasting consequences, including damage to your reputation, loss of certain rights, and difficulties in finding employment. An Attorney Can Often Raise Legal Defenses When facing domestic violence charges, it is vital to have an experienced attorney representing you. A lawyer can often effectively raise legal defenses on your behalf. Here are some common defenses that may be applicable to your case: Self-Defense Self-defense is a defense strategy that argues that you acted in accordance with the law to protect yourself or others from imminent harm. If it can be proven that you reasonably believed that you were in danger and used necessary force to defend yourself, this defense can be effective. False Accusations Domestic violence cases are often he-said, she-said scenarios, making false accusations a potential defense strategy. Your attorney will thoroughly investigate the circumstances surrounding the alleged incident, looking for inconsistencies or motives for false accusations. They will gather evidence, such as text messages, emails, and witness testimonies, to support your defense. Lack of Evidence In any criminal case, the burden of proof lies with the prosecution. If there is insufficient evidence to support the domestic violence charges against you, your attorney can argue for a dismissal or to have the charges reduced. Violation of Constitutional Rights Law enforcement must follow strict protocols when investigating domestic violence cases. If your constitutional rights were violated during the arrest, questioning, or gathering of evidence, this can be used as a defense in court. Your attorney will closely examine the actions of law enforcement to identify any violations. Expert Witness Testimonials In some cases, expert witnesses can provide valuable testimony to support your defense. These experts may include psychologists, forensic experts, or medical professionals who can provide insight into the alleged incident or the mental state of the individuals involved. It is important to note that every case is unique, and the defense strategy will depend on the specific circumstances. This is why having a seasoned attorney who specializes in criminal defense is crucial. They can assess the details of your case and create a tailored defense strategy to give you the best possible outcome. Call an Eau Claire Criminal Defense Attorney  If you are facing domestic violence charges in the area of Eau Claire, it is vital to seek the assistance of a skilled criminal defense attorney. Cohen Law Offices is a team of trial lawyers who are always prepared to take a case to trial. With their advanced preparation approach and deep knowledge of the legal system, they can provide the guidance and support you need in navigating through this challenging time. To learn more about how Cohen Law Offices can help you, contact us today at 715-382-9447 or contact us online to schedule a consultation. Don't face domestic violence charges alone – let the experienced lawyers at Cohen Law Offices fight for your rights and advocate for the best possible outcome.

Being accused of a violent crime can be a daunting and scary experience. It's a situation no one wants to find themselves in, but unfortunately, it can happen to anyone. When facing criminal charges alleging violent conduct, understanding the concept of self-defense and its reasonableness can make a significant difference in your case. If you're in the area of Eau Claire, Wisconsin, and require legal assistance, Cohen Law Offices is here to guide you through the complexities of self-defense cases. Call us today to learn how we can help. What is Self-Defense? Self-defense is a legal concept that allows individuals to use reasonable force to protect themselves from harm or danger. It acknowledges that when faced with imminent threats, individuals have the right to defend themselves physically. The key to understanding self-defense in legal terms is the concept of reasonableness. The Concept of Reasonableness in Self-Defense Cases To determine whether self-defense is reasonable in a particular case, several factors are considered. The totality of the circumstances is taken into account, including the threat's severity, immediacy, and the fear and belief of the person using self-defense. The response must be in proportion to the perceived threat, and force beyond what is necessary may no longer be considered reasonable. When it comes to determining reasonableness, judges and juries review the actions of the person claiming self-defense and evaluate their responses against what a reasonable person would do in the same situation. This evaluation is crucial, as it plays a significant role in determining the outcome of the case. Some of the specifics of Wisconsin's self-defense statute include the following: You cannot use force that is intended or likely to cause fatal injuries or great bodily harm unless you reasonably believe it is necessary to prevent fatal injuries or great bodily harm to yourself. In certain cases, there is a presumption that it was reasonable to believe that the force was necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm if a person trying to break in or had broken into your home, car, or place of business. If you engage in unlawful conduct that is likely to provoke others, you cannot claim self-defense. This provision does not apply if you reasonably believe you were in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. If you do, you can act in self-defense, but not the use of force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm unless you have exhausted every other reasonable means of escape. Do You Need a Lawyer to Raise Self-Defense? It is in your best interest to seek legal representation from an experienced Eau Claire criminal defense lawyer like those at Cohen Law Offices. Navigating the complexities of self-defense cases requires an in-depth understanding of the law and the ability to present a compelling defense. Having a skilled attorney by your side can significantly increase your chances of successfully proving self-defense. Contact an Eau Claire Criminal Defense Lawyer Today If you or someone you know is accused of a violent crime and needs legal assistance in Eau Claire, Wisconsin, Cohen Law Offices is here to help. With over 47 combined years of experience serving clients in Northwest Wisconsin, our team of dedicated criminal defense lawyers is well-equipped to handle self-defense cases. Call us at 715-382-9447 or visit our website to schedule a consultation and let us guide you through the legal process.

Felony drug charges can have a devastating impact on your life and your parental rights. Continue reading to learn the possible consequences.