Case Results

Charges Reduced

Meth Conspiracy

Class X felony facing 6-30 years in prison. Charges were reduced to Unlawful Procurement and the sentence was Drug Court on the condition that all charges be vacated upon successful completion of fine and client walked away with no record at all.

Charges Dismissed

Disorderly Conduct

Client was facing felony criminal trespassing along with marijuana and Disorderly conduct charges. All charges dismissed

Charges Dismissed

Felony Charges

Client accused of 8 Class X felonies by ex-girlfriend. All charges dropped.

Not Guilty

Aggravated DUI

No Jail Time

Felony Charges

Client charged with a class 4 Felony and a class 3 Felony the States and was facing 3 years in prison. Result was probation and no jail time.

Charges Dismissed

Aggravated Firearm Charges

Client faced several aggravated firearm charges against me as well as Class X Distribution drug charges. Client went from facing 10 years in prison to all charges dropped.

Reduced Charge

Aggravated Criminal Sexual Abuse

The client, who was charged with Aggravated Criminal Sexual Abuse as a juvenile in Will County, was accused of touching his young sister in a sexual manner. Attorney DiQuattro maintained a position of strength on the case and vowed to fight the case to protect the young man from the potential lifelong harm that the charges posed against him. Immediately recognizing the defense's position of strength, the prosecutor in the case approached Attorney Diquattro and inquired as to how to resolve the case short of trial. Attorney DiQuattro conveyed that an acceptable disposition would consist of no juvenile adjudication (juvenile felony conviction) or mandatory sex offender registration requirement. The prosecutor was at first reluctant at the proposal but indicated that she would take it into consideration. To further advance this proposal, Attorney DiQuattro had the client undergo a “psychosexual evaluation.” A psychosexual evaluation is an evaluation that is conducted by licensed professional under the Sex Offender Management Board (SOMB). The purpose of this evaluation is to determine the risk level of an individual’s potential to commit further sexual offenses. After undergoing the evaluation, a report was compiled by the licensed evaluators who made a finding that the client was a low risk level for re-offending. Attorney DiQuattro also gathered letters of support from the client’s family members in mitigation. The letters of support demonstrated the family’s support of the young man despite the allegations and also showed that his young sister was not affected by the client’s alleged actions. Attorney DiQuattro presented to psychosexual evaluation and letters of support to the prosecutor to further support his proposal. After reviewing the materials tendered, the prosecutor went along with attorney DiQuattro’s proposal and made an extraordinary offer. The prosecutor offered 2 years of court supervision on a reduced charge of misdemeanor battery. This means that if the client completes his supervision satisfactorily, that the charge will ultimately be dismissed resulting in no adjudication (juvenile conviction) on his record. This disposition also eliminated the mandatory lifetime sex offender registration requirement.

Not Guilty at Trial

Misdemeanor Battery

Client was charged with battery. Specifically, the complaining witness (CW) accused our client of pushing him down and causing injury to his back at the tire garage they both were employed at. Attorney DiQuattro conducted an extensive investigation into the client’s case. This investigation entailed reviewing the discovery, consulting with the client on several occasions and interviewing a witness to the altercation. This witness was the owner of the tire garage and the supervisor to both the client and the CW. The interview of this witness revealed a very different account of events that contradicted the CW’s story. This witness indicated that the complaining witness was the actual aggressor. The witness related that while the client was airing a truck tire, the CW was less than a foot away waving his arms and screaming at the client. The witness further related that any disruption during the process of airing a truck tire can create an extreme safety hazard which could result in the tire exploding and cause serious injuries to anyone in the vicinity. A bench trial commenced at the Markham Courthouse. The state called the CW who testified that the client was the initial aggressor who pushed him down and battered him. Effective cross-examination revealed inconsistencies in his testimony and cast doubt on his credibility. The state called no other witnesses to support their case. Attorney DiQuattro called the client’s manager as a defense witness. The manager testified that he witnessed the CW instigate the argument with the client. Additionally he further testified the client pushed the complaining witness away while he was airing the truck tire. He further testified to the procedures of airing truck tires and the safety hazards that disruptions to the process can cause. Further, the manager was able to successfully withstand the State’s cross-examination which attempted to cast doubt on his credibility and attempted to show a bias against the complaining witness. The manager was able to successfully withstand the State’s cross-examination due to Attorney DiQuattro’s numerous preparation sessions with him. Finally, the client testified in his own defense. The client testified that the CW was the aggressor. He further testified that the complaining witness, who was standing less than a foot away, was screaming and waving his arms at him while he was in the process as of airing a truck tire. He testified that he pushed the CW away not only because he was fearful that the CW was going to hit him, but because of the safety hazard that the CW was posing while the client was pumping air in the truck tire. The State then attempted to cast doubt on both the client and the manager’s testimony by recalling the complaining witness as a rebuttal witness. The complaining witness essentially contradicted his earlier testimony and further cast doubt on his own credibility. After hearing closing arguments, the court without hesitation found the client not guilty of battery. The court’s reasoning was that it found the defense’s witnesses more credible than the CW. The court further found the client was justified in pushing the CW away. This was not only because he was acting in self defense because of the CW placed him under the fear of bodily harm by waving his arms and screaming at the client, but that he lacked the requisite intent to commit a battery. The court further reasoned because he was performing a highly hazardous job duty while pumping air into the tire, he was justified in pushing the CW away to avoid a potential explosion that could have caused serious injury to not only both of them, but to other employees who were in the vicinity.

All Charges Dismissed

First Degree Murder (Mandatory Natural Life Sentence)

The client in this case was arrested and charged with the offense of First-Degree Murder. It was alleged that our client shot and killed two individuals in retaliation for a dispute. First Degree Murder is the most serious charge that an individual can face. What made matters more serious is that the client was facing a mandatory sentence of natural life in prison due to the allegations that there were two individuals that were killed. During the pendency of the case, Attorney DiQuattro reviewed and conducted a detailed, meticulous and multi-layered analysis of the voluminous amount of discovery in the case and consulted with the client on multiple occasions at Cook County Jail. While mounting an aggressive defense, Attorney DiQuattro filed a serious of pretrial motions challenging several evidentiary issues that were discovered during the analysis of the discovery. Arguments on those motions resulted in many favorable rulings for the defense. These rulings ultimately excluded favorable evidence to the prosecution and substantially weakened their case. After completing litigation of the pretrial motions, the case was set for a jury trial. After multiple delays by the prosecution in bringing the case to trial, it was determined from interactions with the prosecution and the surrounding circumstances that the the prosecution was unable to bring the case to trial. As a matter of trial strategy, a demand for trial was filed on behalf of the client. When the defense files a demand for trial, this puts the prosecution on notice that the defense is answering ready for trial. This further puts the prosecution on notice that the client is demanding a speedy trial. This means that the prosecution must bring the accused to trial within 120 days if he or she is in custody or 160 days if he or she is on bond. If the accused is not tried within the mandated amount of time allowed by the speedy trial demand, their rights to a speedy trial are deemed violated and all of the charges are dismissed. In this case, the client was in custody and the prosecution was under the obligation to bring him to trial within 120 days. As the demand for trial was running, the prosecution was unable to procure key evidence needed for trial. The prosecution acquiesced that they would not be able to try the case or meet their burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt as result of not only the unavailability of this key evidence but due to the favorable rulings for the defense on the pretrial motions. The prosecution ultimately dismissed all of the charges against the client. The client and his family were overjoyed with this extraordinary result. The client was then released from Cook County Jail after nearly 4 years of incarceration on this case.

All Charges Dismissed

Retail Theft

Case Dismissed after Community Service

Theft

Not Guilty at Trial

DUI (Blow and Fields Case)

Not Guilty at Trial

DUI (No Blow, No Fields Case)

All Charges Dismissed

Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon

All Charges Dismissed

Home Invasion, Aggravated Criminal Sexual Assault, Aggravated Battery

Second Chance Probation & Charges Dismissed

Armed Violence, Possession of a Stolen Motor Vehicle, Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon, Possession of a Control Substance

Client facing a mandatory minimum of 15 years in prison on the Armed Violence Class X Felony charge as well as potential prison time on all other remaining charges. Detailed and thoughtful analysis of the case and application of a holistic strategy brought this great result which will leave the client with no felony conviction after successfully completing Second Chance Probation.

All Charges Dismissed on Day of Trial

Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon, Possession of a Firearm by a Street Gang Member

Client was accused of illegally possessing a loaded gun. Specifically, the client was accused of running from police who responded to a call of shots fired.  The client was further accused of entering a home without permission and was allegedly witnessed by police tossing the loaded gun into a speaker box in an attempt to hide it.  To make matters more serious, the police further accused the client of being a member of a Chicago Street Gang while illegally possessing the loaded gun. The Charges are broken down as follows: Possession of a Firearm by a Street Gang Member Class 2 Felony (3-10 Years IDOC) An individual convicted of this charge must serve at least 50% of their sentence before being eligible for Mandatory Supervised Release (Formerly Known as Parole) This charge is also NON-PROBATIONABLE A Class 2 felony is typically 3-7 years in the penitentiary. However, this offense is subject to an extended 3-10 years IDOC sentencing parameter due the nature of the charge resulting from the individual being a member of a Street Gang while illegally possessing a loaded firearm. Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon (AUUW) Class 4 Felony (1-3 years IDOC) An individual convicted of this charge must serve at least 50% of their sentence before being eligible for Mandatory Supervised Release (Formerly Known as Parole) This charge is also NON-PROBATIONABLE and individual must serve a mandatory sentence of 1 year in IDOC due to the nature of the charge. The client was also charged with multiple counts of AUUW predicated on the following theories: Did not possess a valid FOID (Firearm Owners Identification) card; Did not possess a valid Conceal and Carry License; Client was under 21 years old while in possession of the firearm; The theories were also predicated upon the client being on a public street and not in his own home. After entering the case, Attorney Jim DiQuattro immediately began analyzing the discovery and preparing the case for trial. After a review of the discovery, conducting extensive case law research and multiple meetings with the client, the case was set for trial. After multiple trial delays mostly attributed to the prosecution due to the absence of essential witnesses, mainly police officers, it was finally revealed that one of the police officers was suspended.   Without this witness, the State’s case ultimately fell apart. After this fact was brought to the attention of the Judge, the Judge ordered the prosecution to provide further information as to the nature of the Officer’s suspension. The prosecution attempted to obtain a continuance.  Attorney DiQuattro objected to the continuance and argued that the suspended officer was an essential prosecution witness.  Attorney DiQuattro further eluded that the State would not be able to prove their case without this officer and noted the multiple trial delays in the case.  As a result, the Judge denied the State’s motion for a continuance. After passing the case and conducting their inquiry, the case was recalled and the prosecution immediately DISMISSED ALL CHARGES and acquiesced they would not be able to prove their case. The client was ecstatic with this extraordinary result. Client was grateful for Attorney DiQuattro's, zealous and aggressive representation which exposed the weaknesses in the State’s case and ultimately resulted in dismissal of all the charges.  The client was finally able to move forward with his life and was finally free of fear the potential lengthy prison sentence he was facing.

Not Guilty at Close of the State's Case

Attempted Murder and Aggravated Battery with a Firearm

Client was arrested and charged with Attempted Murder and Aggravated Battery with a firearm. Client was facing a minimum of 21 years due to a firearm enhancement. The client was sitting in Cook County Jail for 3 years with little to no progress being made on his case by his previous attorneys. His previous attorney told the client to plead guilty to the minimum time of 21 years. After entering the case, Attorney DiQuattro reviewed the discovery, met with the client on several occasions at Cook County Jail and conducted a thorough investigation. Attorney DiQuattro’s review of the case revealed multiple defects and weaknesses in the State’s case. The State’s complaining witness was a convicted felon with an extensive criminal background. The complaining witness was also subsequently arrested during the pendency of the case and convicted of an unrelated crime. The State’s additional witnesses were also either convicted felons, lacked credibility or refused to come to court to testify. There also was a lack of physical evidence linking the client to the crime. Almost a year after Attorney DiQuattro’s involvement with the case and filing a speedy trial demand, a bench trial was conducted at 26 and California. Effective cross-examination revealed multiple inconsistencies in one eyewitness’s testimony that called his credibility into question. Effective cross examination further revealed another eyewitness’s inability to identify the client at the scene. The complaining witness deviated from his previous statement to police thus failing to identify the client as the person who shot him. Other witnesses failed to show up to court to testify. After the State rested its case, the defense moved for a directed verdict of not guilty at the close of the State’s case. The Judge granted the motion without hesitation and found the client not guilty on all counts. The client was so grateful for all the hard work and dedication that went into his case, he cried and expressed how grateful he was for attorneys who did not give up on him. The client was subsequently released and reunited with his family giving him the opportunity to rebuild his life lost to nearly 4 years of incarceration.

Not Guilty at Trial

DUI

Client was charged with DUI. Client was accused of driving down the street near his home under the influence of alcohol after a verbal altercation with his stepdaughter. A bench trial was conducted at Richard J. Daley Center. Client suffers from Type II diabetes. Client's defense presented at trial was that he was suffering from insulin withdrawl which mimics symptoms of intoxication from alcohol consumption. Client's medical records establishing his history of diabetes were introduced into evidence and client testified to his condition on the day of the incident. Finding of Not Guilty.

DUI Charges Amended to Reckless Driving

DUI

Client was arrested in Cook County for Driving Under the Influence. Client was accused of driving into a house which caused severe structural damage to the home. Further it was alleged that the occupants of the home witnessed the crash and identified client as the driver. Client was pulled over by police blocks away from the accident where many indicators of intoxication were implicated. Client also subsequently failed field sobriety tests. He was then arrested and charged with DUI and other traffic offenses. Fearful of the impact that the DUI charge could have on his future, client contacted Attorney DiQuattro to represent him in the case. Attorney DiQuattro entered the case and conduced a full analysis of the discovery. The prosecutor in the case approached attorney DiQuattro with an offer to resolve the case that would result in the client having the DUI conviction show up on his record. Unsatisfied with the offer, Attorney DiQuattro drafted and submitted a mitigation letter to the prosecutor on behalf of his client. A mitigation letter is basically a narrative of the client's background that highlights all the positive aspects of the client's background which in this case, included his lack of criminal background. After reviewing the mitigation letter, the prosecutor agreed to a disposition of amending the client's charges from DUI to reckless driving. The prosecutor also agreed that the client would serve a specified term of supervision which upon successful completion, would not be considered a conviction. Client was ecstatic about the result and grateful for Attorney DiQuattro's zealous representation which resulted in the client not having to take a DUI conviction on his record.

Court Supervision with Community Service

Driving on a Suspended License

Client was charged with Driving on a Suspended License and other traffic violations in Will County. Client was frustrated with the legal process and had no idea why his license was suspended. After entering the case, Attorney DiQuattro was able to guide the client through the legal process and resolve the confusion. After making an inquiry to the Secretary of State, Attorney DiQuattro discovered that client's license was suspended due to a long forgotten unresolved ticket client had received a year earlier. Attorney Diquattro was able to motion up the long lost ticket and have it dismissed. This resulted in the client's license suspension being rescinded and his driving privileges were restored. Attorney DiQuattro and client then returned to court to resolve the suspended license and remaining traffic tickets. The Assistant State's Attorney assigned to the case initially refused to dismiss the charges or make an offer of supervision to client due to past traffic offenses. She was seeking a conditional discharge which is considered a misdemeanor conviction in Illinois and 30 days jail time. Attorney DiQuattro then engaged in aggressive negotiations with the Assistant State's Attorney which resulted in the client receiving supervision on the suspended license charge with community service. The State also agreed to dismiss the remaining traffic offenses. The client was grateful for Attorney DiQuattro's guidance and zealous representation which restored his driving privileges and completely avoided any convictions on his record.

Case Dismissed at First Court Date

Misdemeanor Possession of Cannabis

Wigell Criminal Defense through its Associate Attorney Jim DiQuattro, appeared at the Cook County Courthouse located on Belmont and Western in Chicago on behalf of a client, a college student who was charged with misdemeanor possession of marijuana. Having never been in trouble with the law, our client was fearful that this charge would tarnish his record and would cause great difficulty in obtaining a job after graduation. Wigell Criminal Defense accepted his case and was able to obtain a positive outcome for the client. After arriving at the courthouse and speaking with the client, Attorney DiQuattro filed his appearance with the court clerk as client’s attorney of record. Immediately after filing his appearance, Attorney DiQuattro engaged in discussion with the Assistant State’s Attorney about the client’s case and analyzed the strength of the State’s case against the client. Attorney DiQuattro was able to secure a dismissal of the case. Attorney DiQuattro was able to determine that the State’s key witness, the arresting officer was not present which was the crux of the State’s case against the client. After this fact was brought to the attention of the Judge and his attorney’s timely speedy trial demand, the Judge ordered an immediate dismissal of the case. The client was very grateful for Attorney DiQuattro’s diligent and zealous representation which ultimately protected and preserved his clean criminal record. The next step will be to file a Petition for expungement of the arrest.

DUI Charges Dismissed & Amended Charge

DUI

Client was charged with multiple offenses stemming from a hit and run accident. Specifically, the client was charged with 3 counts of DUI, 1 count of driving without insurance, 1 count of driving without a license and 1 count of leaving the scene of an accident resulting in personal injuries (a felony). The client was accused of driving the wrong direction on a one-way street which resulted in the client becoming involved in a collision with another vehicle carrying multiple occupants which resulted in personal injuries. The client was further accused of leaving the scene of the accident and being under the influence of alcohol while driving. It was also alleged that the client had a strong odor of alcohol on his breath and slurred speech. Fearful of the implications the DUI case could have upon his life, client retained Jim DiQuattro of Wigell Criminal Defense to handle his case. After reviewing the discovery and having multiple meetings with the client, Attorney DiQuattro determined that the case should be taken to trial. Attorney DiQuattro’s review of the discovery revealed multiple weaknesses in the State’s case. Additionally, favorable details for the client’s defense were revealed during the multiple meetings with the client. The case was then set for trial at the Richard J. Daley Center. On the day of trial, Attorney DiQuattro was ready to proceed to trial when the prosecutor assigned to the case made an unexpected offer. The prosecutor offer to dismiss the multiple DUI charges and other various traffic offenses in exchange for a 6-month term of supervision on an amended Charge of Leaving the Scene of an Accident for Failure to Render Aid. This amendment resulted from the original felony charge of Leaving the Scene of an Accident being reduced to a misdemeanor. The prosecutor indicated he was ready to proceed to trial, however, the prosecutor also acquiesced and acknowledged the multiple weaknesses in the case. After conveying the prosecutor’s unexpected offer and explaining the legality of the offer to the client, the client accepted the offer without hesitation. The client was overjoyed that the DUI charges were dismissed and the felony count of Leaving the Scene of an accident was amended to a misdemeanor. This outcome resulted in no conviction on the client’s record (upon successful completion of supervision) allowing him to move on with his life without the fear of a DUI conviction hanging over his head.

Probation Terminated Satisfactorily-No Jail Time

6th Violation of Probation

Client was on probation for assault and battery. Client incurred various probation violations during the course of his mandated time. After his 6th violation, the client was facing the strong possibility of being taken off probation and sentenced to jail time. The nature of the 6th violation was premised upon the fact that the client failed two required drug tests. Facing the reality of probable incarceration, client contacted Wigell Criminal Defense the day before his next court date to help mitigate the situation. Wigell Criminal Defense took the case and made arrangements to be present with the client in court the next day. After arriving at court and speaking with the client, Attorney DiQuattro of Wigell Criminal Defense determined that client had a drug addiction issue that resulted in the failed drug test. Attorney DiQuattro spoke to the State’s Attorney assigned to the case who maintained the position that they would be seeking jail time for the client. The Judge was also in agreement with the State’s position on the matter at that time. After obtaining a continuance and investigating the matter further, Attorney DiQuattro spoke with the client’s probation officer regarding the client’s matter. After a meaningful conversation, the probation officer was willing to support Attorney DiQuattro’s position that the client should be given another chance to complete his probation successfully despite the 6th violation. At the next court date, Attorney DiQuattro conveyed to the Judge of the client’s drug addiction issue and the probation officer’s position supporting the client. Attorney DiQuattro also brought to the Judge’s attention that the client was in an out-patient drug rehabilitation center and had successfully passed three subsequent drug tests since the 6th violation. The Judge took the aforementioned facts presented by Attorney DiQuattro into consideration and allowed the client one more chance to complete his probation absent any further violations. After a few more court dates, client was able to get back on track with his probation and the Judge terminated the probation satisfactorily. Client was grateful for Attorney DiQuattro’s zealous representation. This allowed the client to successfully complete his probation despite a 6th violation and avoid any jail time when all odds appeared to be against him.

Case Dismissed

Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon

Reduced to a Petty Offense

Aggravated Speeding

All Charges Dismissed

Retail Theft

Case Dismissed Prior to First Court Date

Driving on a Suspended License

Previous client was charged with driving on a suspended license and various traffic violations in Kankakee County. While working with the client, Attorney DiQuattro investigated the matter and discovered that The Secretary of State (SOS) incorrectly suspended client's license. After Attorney DiQuattro and client coordinated with the SOS, client's license was restored and a letter rescinding the suspension was obtained. Attorney DiQuattro then called the Assistant State's Attorney assigned to the case prior to the court date. After explaining the situation and engaging in persuasive negotiations with the Assistant State's Attorney, she agreed to dismiss all charges on the phone! The client appeared in court the following day and the charges were formally dismissed by the Assistant State's Attorney in court. Client was grateful for Attorney DiQuattro's work on his case which avoided any fines and possible convictions on his record.

Mental Health Probation

Aggravated Battery of a Police Officer

Client was charged with Aggravated Battery of a Police Officer. Aggravated Battery of a Police Officer is a Class 2 Felony in Illinois punishable from 3-7 years in the penitentiary. Client was accused of driving away from a police officer during a traffic stop and then subsequently became involved in a physical altercation with the police officer after the officer followed client back to his home. The officer was allegedly injured during the altercation and taken to the hospital for medical treatment. Attorney DiQuattro conducted a full detailed analysis of the discovery and consulted with the client in Cook County Jail. Attorney DiQuattro learned that the client suffered from an array of mental illnesses and was not on his medication at the time of the alleged incident. After reviewing the discovery and consulting with the client, Attorney DiQuattro determined that the best course of action would be to have the client placed on mental health probation. Attorney DiQuattro then approached the Assistant State's Attorney assigned to the case with this information. Despite these facts and that the client had a very minimal criminal background, the State was seeking prison time. Determined to fight for the client, the case proceeded to a 402 conference with the Judge assigned to the case. A 402 conference is a meeting between the Judge, State's Attorneys and Defense Attorneys where mitigating and aggravating factors are presented to the Judge. The Judge then takes all factors into consideration and makes his own recommendation for sentencing. During the conference, the Defense informed the Judge of all the mitigating factors including the client's struggle with mental illness, the issue of his medication, his personal background and his minimal criminal background. The State informed the Judge of all of the aggravating factors which were premised upon the allegations of the the charges. It was also revealed during the 402 Conference that the injuries allegedly sustained by the officer were minor. After taking all factors into consideration, the Judge recommended the client be placed on mental health probation. The client was overjoyed by this result and was released from Cook County Jail later that day. Client was very thankful for all the hard work and dedication that was put into his case. He was reunited with his wife and three children and is now getting the help that he needs through the mental health probation program to cope with his mental illness instead of serving prison time without treatment.

Charges Reduced to Misdemeanor Battery

Home Invasion

Our 19 year old client was charged with Home Invasion in Champaign County. Client and two co-defendants were accused of breaking into the alleged victim’s home and committing a battery upon him resulting in injuries. Client and his parents were fearful of the mandatory minimum prison sentence the client was facing with the Home Invasion charge. Home Invasion is a Class X Felony in Illinois. The sentence range for a Class X Felony is 6-30 years in IDOC. A conviction of Home Invasion requires the Judge to sentence the accused to a mandatory minimum of 6 years in prison. It is not probational. Several weaknesses and flaws in the State’s case were revealed during the preliminary hearing and after an extensive review of the discovery. The Assistant State’s Attorney assigned to the case acquiesced in the weaknesses and flaws and also acknowledged our client’s lack of criminal background. As a result of these factors being brought to the Assistant States Attorney’s attention, a very favorable result was obtained. The State dismissed the Class X Home Invasion charge and filed a Class A Misdemeanor Battery Charge in its place. A Class A Misdemeanor is an offense that is punishable by 364 days in jail, up to a $2500 fine and up to 24 months of probation. As a result of Wigell Criminal Defense Holistic Strategies through its Associate Attorney, Jim DiQuattro, the client received 12 months of probation with a requirement to perform 50 hours of community service. The client was very satisfied with the result and was overjoyed that prison time and a felony conviction were completely avoided. The client and his parents were grateful for the hard work and dedication that Wigell Criminal Defense put forward in the case. The next step will be to file a petition to seal the client’s misdemeanor after the requisite waiting period has passed.

SWAP Reinstated-Violation Dismissed

Violation of SWAP

Just hours before the court appearance, Paul C. called Wigell Criminal Defense in a panic. Paul C. (Not his real name) previously plead guilty to a misdemeanor offense of disorderly conduct. As a requirement of the sentence of the plea, Paul C. was required to complete 30 hours of S.W.A.P. S.W.A.P (Sheriff’s Work Alternative Program) is a program where individuals charged with DUI or other misdemeanor offenses can have the opportunity to perform community service instead of serving a sentence of jail time. Individuals involved in this program work on a variety of public works projects such as cleaning up various parks, streets, and other public property. Individuals work under the supervision of the Sheriff’s department of the county their case is pending in. Paul C. did not complete the S.W.A.P requirement in the time mandated under the conditions of the plea and the State filed a violation. After conferring with Paul C. and working out the logistics of making the same day court appearance, Wigell Criminal Defense accepted the case and appeared with him at Markham Courthouse. After arriving at the courthouse, Attorney DiQuattro, connected with the emotional client and consulted with him as to the circumstances surrounding the situation. Attorney DiQuattro learned that a series of unfortunate events prevented Paul C. from signing up for S.W.A.P. Attorney DiQuattro then subsequently filed his appearance and then immediately engaged in discussion with the Assistant State’s Attorney assigned to the case. The ASA offered Paul C. 15 days in Cook County Jail. The State maintained their position and would not agree to allow Paul C. to have a second chance at completing the S.W.A.P. requirement. After assessing the magnitude of the situation, Attorney DiQuattro using his knowledge of Wigell Criminal Defense Holistic Strategies began strategizing methods to prevent Paul C. from being taken into custody at Cook County Jail. After careful and meticulous preparation, Attorney DiQuattro had the case called and brought the matter before the Judge. Attorney DiQuattro conveyed to the Judge that Paul C. should be given another opportunity to complete S.W.A.P and that a jail sentence was not appropriate under the circumstances. After consideration of defense arguments, the Judge dismissed the violation and reinstated the condition of S.W.A.P. The Judge also allowed Paul C. an extended period of time to the complete all the requirements of S.W.A.P. Paul C. was ecstatic and very grateful for Attorney DiQuattro’s methodical preparation and zealous representation of his case. Paul C. then subsequently registered for S.W.A.P and was immediately assigned to a project to complete the required 30 days.