Success Stories

JUDGE DECLARES ARREST ILLEGAL!

Mr. H. was visiting Chicago from another state and was trying to save money by sleeping in his car. He was surprised to be awoken by an officer and then charged with driving while under the influence of alcohol. Mr. Wallin argued to the Court that Mr. H. was illegally arrested without probable cause to believe that he was under the influence of alcohol, based on the total lack of evidence to show that Mr. H. was confused in any way, shape or form. After the motion was granted, the State dropped all charges. Prior to the hearing, Mr. Wallin successfully obtained a rescission of Mr. H’s statutory summary suspension.

Afterwards, Mr. H. thanked Wallin for his thorough preparation, which included coming to court with a copy of a United States Supreme Court case that was issued the day prior to the hearing. Here is an excerpt from Mr. H.’s letter:
Click Here

CLIENT: “YOU SAVED MY LIFE!”

Mr. A. was facing revocation of his license after he was accused of being intoxicated and causing a traffic accident. According to the officer, Mr. A. was so drunk that he could barely support himself. This was Mr. A.’s second DUI arrest. At trial, Attorney Wallin took advantage of a discrepancy between the testimony of the accident victim and the officer as to the date and time of the incident, and argued that the State had not proven the facts of the incident beyond a reasonable doubt. The trial judge agreed, and directed a finding of Not Guilty. Afterwards, Mr. A. told Wallin that “You’re the Man! You saved my life! I’m going to erect a statue of you on my front lawn!”

ILLEGAL STOP MEANS DUI IS TOSSED!

The police claimed they received an anonymous report of a man and a woman having sex and doing drugs in a vehicle parked on a Chicago street. However, when the officers arrived, they did not observe any illegal activity. Nevertheless they stopped Mr. M. to investigate and later charged him with a DUI. Attorney Wallin argued to the Court that in order to make an investigatory stop based upon an informant’s tip, the officer must first make observations that corroborate their information. Without such evidence, the officer cannot make any further investigation. After the Court granted Mr. Wallin’s motion, the State dropped all charges.

LONG FIRST COURT DATE EQUALS DISMISSAL!

Mr. S. was facing serious jail time after he was arrested for DUI for allegedly striking a vehicle, careening into a building, and then attempting to drive away but instead crashing into another vehicle, spinning into a third vehicle, which then hit a bus. Attorney Wallin quickly realized, however, that the arresting officer picked an initial court date more than two months after the date of the incident, in violation of an Illinois Supreme Court Rule. When the case went to court, Mr. Wallin presented a Motion to Dismiss, which a Circuit Court Judge granted in light of this due process violation.

Client Found Not Guilty After 0.19 Breath Score Suppressed!

Randall C. was charged with improper lane usage and DUI after he scored a 0.19 on the breath test. Because he had a prior DUI, he was facing revocation of his driver’s license. Mr. Wallin developed a game plan which challenged the manner in which the breath analysis machine had been calibrated, and a Skokie Judge granted the Motion to Bar the results of the breath test from evidence at trial. Without the breath test result, the state’s evidence of intoxication was greatly diminished, and a Judge found Mr. C. Not Guilty.

WALLIN BEATS CLIENT’S DUI AND DRIVING WHILE SUSPENDED CASES!

Norman H. was charged with his second DUI. At trial, Mr. Wallin was able to show that the arresting officer had observed Norman drive for more than one half mile, without observing any erratic driving, except for momentarily going over the speed limit as he crossed a railroad track. After hearing only the officer’s testimony, a Markham Judge found Mr. H. Not Guilty of DUI. While this case was pending, Mr. H. was twice arrested for driving while suspended. Mr. Wallin obtained dismissals for his client on both cases, including one where he successfully argued that Mr. H. was illegally arrested after the police stopped him solely because a random check of his plates revealed that the car’s owner was suspended. Mr. Wallin argued that because the officer could not know whether the driver was in fact the owner of the vehicle, the officer had no legal justification for the stop.

COURT: NO PROBABLE CAUSE TO ARREST!

Mr. T., aged 64, was arrested for DUI after he allegedly caused a traffic accident, then scored a 0.19 on the breath machine. Mr. Wallin argued that at the time of the arrest, before the breath test was given, the officer did not have probable cause to believe that Mr. T. was under the influence of alcohol, since his actions were consistent with any 64-year-old who had just been in an automobile accident. The Court agreed, and suppressed all evidence. With no evidence left to use at trial, the State dropped all charges.

COURT AGREES WITH WALLIN: DEFENDANT IN SHOCK, NOT DRUNK!

Mr. J. was charged with DUI after he hit a parked car. During Mr. Wallin’s cross-examination, the police officer admitted that, although Mr. J. swayed and stumbled as he walked immediately after the accident, by the time they reached the police station, he was able to walk perfectly fine. After hearing all the evidence, the Court agreed with Mr. Wallin that the evidence was consistent with a person in shock, not intoxicated, and that State did not prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

JURY AGREES WITH WALLIN THAT POLICE MISTREATMENT OF CLIENT DISCREDITS PROSECUTION

Mr. S. was charged with DUI and various other traffic offenses. Mr. Wallin argued to the jury that the Officer had mistreated his 60 year old client, by strip-searching him and grading the field sobriety tests as if he were a young man 40 years younger. After deliberating for over three hours, the jury came back Not Guilty.

AFTER GETTING THE WHOLE STORY, JUDGE FINDS CLIENT NOT GUILTY

Mr. Wallin’s client had spent an evening hanging out a local tavern with his friends. Over the course of the night, he had three beers. Feeling perfectly fine to drive, he was surprised to be pulled over and charged with a DUI and improper weaving. Because Mr. K. had a prior DUI, he was faced with revocation of his driver’s license. Mr. Wallin cross-examined the arresting officer to show that the failing scores that Mr. K had received on the field sobriety tests were merely the officer’s opinion, and that Mr. K. had actually done quite well. Further, Mr. Wallin had an automotive expert testify that Mr. K’s vehicle had a steering condition that made it impossible to drive straight, and he showed the Judge pictures of the street showing that Mr. K. had not weaved excessively, because if he had, he would have hit a parked car. After hearing all the evidence, a Cook County Judge found Mr. K not guilty.