Are you facing criminal charges in the Chicago area? At the Law Offices of Michael P. Schmiege, our founding attorney has years of experience in protecting the rights of people who have been accused of DUI, drug crimes, violent crimes, theft, white collar crimes, arson, armed robbery, criminal appeals, sex crimes, and more.
Tell your story
We value your side the story and will help you navigate the Illinois criminal justice system.
We are available around your schedule to lend help when you need it most.
Michael Schmiege is a nationally recognized Chicago criminal defense attorney who wins.
We fight vigorously for your rights to achieve the best possible outcome for you.
"Mr. Schmiege is well respected by the court because he is a very honest man. He was very kind and respectful to me. His fees were reasonable. His office is very easy to find, and his staff is very helpful."
"Michael Schmiege is an excellent attorney. He is honest, diligent and gets great results. If you find yourself in need of a lawyer, he is great at what he does. Never over-promises, but definitely delivered more than we had hoped for. His team will help you all the way. Answers all your questions promptly and clearly states what to expect. I highly recommend Michael and his team. They CAN and will help!"
"I am so appreciative of the help and support that I received from Michael and his team members! They truly helped me figure out my case and I got outstanding results. If anyone can help you get great results, it’s Michael. I had an immigration issue as well and he worked with my immigration lawyer to help find the best solution. He understood that I made a mistake but it didn’t define who I was. I definitely don’t want to go through any of this again but I’m glad that I had the support to get through this."
Experience. 10+ years of experience fighting criminal charges on behalf of the accused.
Integrity. We are honest and upfront with you to ensure you understand our defense strategy.
Passion. You deserve our unwavering commitment to defend your rights.
Vision. We believe in the value of a powerful legal advocate.
Dedication. We care about your rights and are available 24/7 to answer your questions.
Success. We aim to deliver the best possible outcomes for every client, every time.
NOT GUILTY – Possession of a Controlled Substance w/ Intent to Deliver
Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol – NOT GUILTY
Even in cases in which the individual is completely innocent, if you have been arrested this indicates that the prosecutor considers there is enough evidence to get a conviction. Unfortunately, you will be forced to prove your innocence in court. The attorney you select to represent you has an important impact on the outcome of the case. Contact our firm at once to initiate the defense actions that must take place when the client is innocent of the charge.
Our legal team takes pride in our impressive record in the defense of clients charged with even the most serious of criminal offenses. We will fully analyze the case, the evidence, all reports and statements and determine what strategy will be employed to fight for your freedom. We know how important the outcome of the case is and are prepared to aggressively defend our clients, no matter how hopeless the case may first appear. An aggressive and dedicated defense lawyer from our team can increase the possibility of a better outcome on any criminal charges. Act quickly, as a strong defense begins from the moment you are arrested.
Contact a Chicago criminal defense attorney from the Law Offices of Michael P. Schmiege for aggressive legal represenation in all types of criminal charges. Fill out our free case evaluation form today!
The Law Office of Michael P. Schmiege
Yes. Circumstantial evidence is enough to convict someone at trial. The standard for finding someone guilty in a criminal trial is “proof beyond a reasonable doubt.” This standard can be met using either direct evidence or circumstantial evidence. An experienced criminal attorney can explain this more indepth.
Direct evidence is evidence that, if believed by the fact-finder, proves the existence of a certain fact without needing any inference or “connecting the dots.” For example, if Susan sees Mary put a diamond ring into her purse and then walk out of the store without paying for the ring, then Susan’s testimony would be direct evidence that Mary committed a theft.
Circumstantial evidence is also known as indirect evidence. Circumstantial evidence involves the connections of a series of facts that, when examined together using reason and experience, can lead one to infer a certain conclusion. For example, say that Susan, a jewelry store employee, knew that Mary had very little money and loved diamond rings. One day, Susan and Mary were alone in the jewelry store, where a diamond ring lay on a table. Susan leaves the room briefly and when she returns, Mary and the diamond ring are gone. One can reasonably infer from that set of facts that Mary stole the diamond ring. There are alternative explanations, though, because Susan did not witness the alleged theft. A criminal attorney will be able to develop a strong defense to a circumstantial evidence case.
It is not difficult to imagine a scenario in which circumstantial evidence is all that is needed to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. For example, imagine Jane sees Tom go into an empty house with Jim. Then, Jane hears screams and shortly thereafter sees Tom run from the house covered in blood and carrying a knife that is later proved to be the weapon used to stab Jim to death. We have to infer from the facts presented what happened. The facts are: 1) Tom and Jim go into a house together; 2) the house was empty before Tom and Jim entered it; 3) someone screamed; 4) Jim was stabbed to death; and, 5) Tom was seen running from the home covered in blood and carrying the murder weapon. We can fill in the dots, so to speak, to believe that Tom stabbed Jim. However, Jane did not actually see Tom stab Jim, so there is no direct evidence.
Clearly, direct evidence makes it easier to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. However, a prosecutor can still convince a jury using only circumstantial evidence that a defendant committed the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. An experienced criminal lawyer will be able to win a case where there is direct or circumstantial evidence. The important questions to ask is: What is the evidence? Are there reasonable ways to interpret the evidence that lead to a conclusion other than the defendant committed the crime? Each judge and jury is different. What may be persuasive to one jury falls short of persuading another. That is why it is important to have an experienced and skilled criminal attorney defending you at trial, no matter how circumstantial the evidence may be.
Are You Accused of a Crime?
Criminal Defense Attorney Michael Schmiege is experienced in defending criminal cases in Chicago and throughout the United States. If you or a loved one has been accused of a crime it is important that you contact an experienced criminal defense lawyer today. Call our office for a free consultation.
All police officers are required to comply with the U.S. Constitution, police procedures, and the law when making traffic stops. Failure to do so often means that a DUI charge should be dropped. Here are some common defenses criminal lawyers use for DUI charges in Illinois.
1. There was no reasonable suspicion to make a stop. Unless you were stopped a routine checkpoint that stopped vehicles in a lawful pattern (i.e., they stopped every third car, not just cars they wanted to stop), then an officer must have reasonable suspicion that a crime is or is about to be committed in order to pull you over. This includes minor traffic stops. Reasonable suspicion can come from an anonymous tip of unsafe driving, as long as the police officer personally verifies the erratic driving. An experienced criminal lawyer will be able to tell you if there was reasonable suspicion to make a stop.
2. No signs of intoxication. If there are no signs of intoxication once an officer pulls you over, then the officer cannot request that you take a Standardized Field Sobriety Test or that you submit to a breath test machine. In order to do so, the officer must have reasonable suspicion of intoxication. Reasonable suspicion of intoxication includes, but is not limited to, slurred speech, glassy eyes, the smell of alcohol, or admission of the use of drugs or alcohol by the driver.
3. Unlawful arrest. Sometimes, police officers pull a car over for a minor traffic infraction, such as a broken taillight, in the hopes of finding probable cause to arrest the driver for a driving under the influence offense. If the officer arrests you before such probable cause arises, then that arrest is unlawful. All evidence gathered after an unlawful arrest, such as evidence of intoxication, may be deemed inadmissible in court. It is not always clear when an arrest has occurred. A criminal attorney should review the facts of your case to determine if the police officer made an unlawful arrest.
4. Improperly scored Standardized Field Sobriety Tests. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration recognizes that several mistakes that can occur while administering the SFST result in a failure of the test. These mistakes skew the results in favor of impairment and therefore cannot be relied upon to determine if someone committed a DUI offense.
5. An experienced attorney. Your best defense against a DUI charge is an experienced criminal attorney. There are many ins and outs of DUI defense. Each case is factually distinct and a good attorney will know how to best apply the facts of your case to the law in order to get you the best outcome possible. If you are charged with a DUI, the penalties can be severe. You should contact a skilled attorney as soon as possible to assist you with your defense.
Contact a DUI Defense Lawyer in Chicago
Contact criminal attorney Michael Schmiege today if you have been arrested for DUI in Illinois. Mr. Schmiege will provide an honest assessment of your case. Contact us today.