Criminal Defense Archives

World Series Legal Wisdom: Celebrate the Brewers Without a Court Date

October 22, 2026/in Criminal Defense/by Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP

Updated October 29, 2026: WE DID IT! Our Milwaukee Brewers are World Series champions for the first time in franchise history, and all of us here at Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP are still pinching ourselves. Our firm opened its doors in 1968, two years before the Brewers arrived, and we have been cheering for this team since its inception. Now the trophy is finally coming home, and we will be celebrating along with the rest of Milwaukee during Friday’s championship parade. The same rules that kept our World Series run safe and fun still apply on parade day, so let’s make this championship celebration one for the books!

44 years! That’s how long we have waited for the Brewers to return to the World Series. In fact, it’s been so long, the Brewers aren’t even in the same league as they were the last time they appeared in the Fall Classic back in 1982.

That 1982 team, nicknamed Harvey’s Wallbangers because of their high-powered lineup of home run hitters, pushed the St. Louis Cardinals to seven games before coming up short. Now the Brew Crew is back, and Game 1 of the World Series will be Friday night against the Tampa Bay Rays at American Family Field.

From Kenosha to Green Bay to La Crosse, the whole state will be wearing blue and gold. Sports bars will be packed, living rooms will be full, and every rally cap in Wisconsin will get a workout as we cheer on the Brewers’ chase for their first-ever World Series victory.

While the whole state is partying and watching the Brewers, Wisconsin law won’t be taking any time off; a few bad decisions can turn what we all hope will be the best week in Brewers history into a legal nightmare. So, to stay out of trouble, take it one inning at a time and keep your head in the game; from the first tailgate until last call. If you follow the rules, the only thing you’ll be calling for after the game is an Uber.

1st Inning: Tailgate Like a Pro, and Leave the Open Can in the Lot

Tailgating at American Family Field is a big part of the fun, and the team sets the rules for its own lots. Lots open three hours before first pitch, or two and a half hours for weekday evening games, and tailgating wraps up 30 minutes after the game starts.

The Brewers enforce those rules directly. Parking staff can end your tailgate, tow your car, or revoke your tickets under the Milwaukee Brewers tailgating policy, which also allows only gas grills or self-contained charcoal units and prohibits underage drinking.

Walking off the lot is a different story. Milwaukee Code of Ordinances section 106-1.8 bans open alcohol on city streets and sidewalks, so carrying a beer toward a watch party on Water Street or into the Third Ward invites a ticket. Outside a permitted event, a violation of the City of Milwaukee’s public drinking ordinance starts at a forfeiture of $50 to $250.

An open container in your car on the drive home breaks a separate state law, and an open container can lead an officer to an OWI investigation.

2nd Inning: Your Ride Home Is the Most Important Lineup Decision of the Night

Every good baseball manager knows how much the cleanup hitter in the lineup matters, and just as important is your plan for getting home clean after the game. In Wisconsin, a first OWI is usually treated like a traffic ticket rather than a crime: under Wis. Stat. § 346.65(2)(am)1, the penalty is a $150 to $300 forfeiture, with no jail time. The bigger hit is your license. The court must revoke it for six to nine months.

Prosecutors can charge you two ways at once: for driving while impaired, and for driving with a prohibited alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more, the limit for most drivers.

A child in the car changes the whole game. With a passenger under 16, the OWI penalty statute turns even a first offense into a criminal case carrying a fine of $350 to $1,100 and five days to six months in jail.

The license loss comes from the court revocation statute, and a driver revoked for a first OWI can apply for an occupational license at any time to keep some limited driving privileges. A designated driver, a rideshare, or a bus home costs far less than any of it. If you were already stopped, these common mistakes can hurt an OWI defense, and GRGB’s OWI defense attorneys can review the stop, the testing, and the paperwork.

3rd Inning: Watch Party Rules for the Under-21 Crowd

Young fans deserve to enjoy the Brewers’ quest for their first World Series as much as the older folks, just without the beer. Under Wis. Stat. § 125.07(4), anyone under 21 who is not with a parent, guardian, or spouse of legal drinking age cannot knowingly possess or drink alcohol. A first violation brings a forfeiture of $100 to $200, a possible driver’s license suspension, community service, or a combination of these penalties.

Handing an underage friend your ID, or altering one, is a separate violation under Wisconsin’s false identification law.

4th Inning: Being Drunk Isn’t the Crime. Being Disorderly Is

Here is some good news for the overserved: being drunk in public is not, in and of itself, a crime in Wisconsin. State policy under Wis. Stat. § 51.45 directs treatment rather than prosecution for intoxication alone. When officers find someone incapacitated by alcohol, they must place that person in protective custody and arrange treatment, which can mean an emergency room visit instead of a jail cell.

Acting out when you’re drunk is totally a different story. Loud, abusive, or boisterous behavior that tends to cause a disturbance is disorderly conduct under Wis. Stat. § 947.01, and it can be charged two ways in Milwaukee.

The state disorderly conduct statute makes it a Class B misdemeanor, with up to 90 days in jail, a $1,000 fine, or both. Milwaukee’s own disorderly conduct ordinance is a non-criminal citation with a forfeiture of up to $500.

The same goes for the end of the night. When the bar calls last call and tells you to head out, arguing your way into one more round is a losing bet. Staying put after the owner or staff tells you to leave can become trespass under the trespass statute, and getting loud about it on the way out can add a disorderly conduct charge on top.

5th Inning: Keep the Fights on the Field

Trash talk with a Rays fan may be fair game. But as much as you might feel the urge, shoving or throwing punches at one is not. Under Wis. Stat. § 940.60, intentionally causing bodily harm to another person without consent is battery, a Class A misdemeanor carrying up to nine months in jail, a $10,000 fine, or both.

Wisconsin reorganized its battery laws in 2025, so the current battery statute now holds ordinary, substantial, and aggravated battery in one section. A more serious injury can move the same physical altercation into felony territory: substantial battery is a Class I felony, and aggravated battery starts at a Class H felony.

If you do wind up in fisticuffs with an opposing fan, who threw the first punch, what the phone videos show, and whether you were protecting yourself or someone else will all matter a lot to your defense.

6th Inning: The Long Bathroom Line Is Not a Legal Defense

Packed stadiums and packed bars mean long lines, and a tie game or a rally inning with bases loaded and nobody out makes every minute in line feel longer. But long lines for the bathroom are not a valid excuse to “relieve yourself” somewhere else.

In Milwaukee, public urination is generally handled as a municipal citation. This is better than a criminal charge, and it usually means a forfeiture instead of jail time. But the citation still requires a response by the court date printed on it, and a ticket you ignore won’t just “go away” after the final out.

7th Inning Stretch: Celebrate Without Breaking Anything

The seventh-inning stretch is for your arms and legs, not a stranger’s car antenna. Intentionally damaging someone else’s property without consent is criminal damage to property under Wis. Stat. § 943.01, a Class A misdemeanor.

Once the damage exceeds $2,500 in value, the charge becomes a Class I felony. The property damage statute measures the loss by the lower of the repair cost or the replacement cost, and a tipped car or a smashed bus shelter can cross that line quickly.

A Class I felony carries up to three years and six months in prison, a $10,000 fine, or both under Wisconsin’s felony penalty statute. Phone video from the crowd can identify participants days later, long after the confetti is swept up.

8th Inning: When Emotions Boil Over at Home

Not every fan watches the World Series in the stadium or at a bar, and big games can bring real tension to a household. If officers find probable cause of a domestic abuse crime against a spouse or former spouse, a co-parent, or an adult you live or lived with, Wis. Stat. § 968.075 requires an arrest when there is a risk of further abuse, a physical injury, or you were the predominant aggressor.

The person who called police cannot call it off. The district attorney’s office decides whether charges go forward.

For the next 72 hours, you must stay away from the alleged victim’s home, even if you live there too, and have no contact unless the alleged victim signs a written waiver. Violating the no-contact rule can bring up to nine months in jail and a $10,000 fine, and a new domestic abuse crime during that window can turn a misdemeanor into a felony.

Even a misdemeanor domestic violence conviction can trigger a federal ban on possessing firearms and ammunition.

9th Inning: What If You Strike Out Anyway?

Even the very best ball players strike out sometimes, so if your night ends with flashing lights, this doesn’t have to be the final out. Stay calm, do not argue or resist, and say clearly that you want to remain silent and you want a lawyer. Do not explain your side to officers at the scene or on jail phones, which are often recorded.

Write down what you remember while it is fresh: where you were, who you were with, what you drank, and who recorded video. Keep receipts, bar tabs, and rideshare records, because the timeline can matter, and share them with a Milwaukee criminal defense attorney before your first court appearance.

And whatever else you do, don’t post anything about what happened online!

Victory Lap: Parade Day in Downtown Milwaukee

Our championship parade starts at 10 a.m. Friday at N. 4th Street and W. Wisconsin Avenue and ends with a rally at Henry Maier Festival Park, where gates open at 8 a.m. Downtown road closures begin at 7 a.m., so leaving the car at home saves you the traffic and the parking hunt. Drinking at the rally and then driving home carries the same OWI exposure as driving home from the ballpark.

Unless the city announces an exception for the parade, Milwaukee’s ban on open alcohol on public streets and sidewalks applies along the route. The rally grounds at Maier Festival Park set their own rules on what you can bring in and buy.

Shoving through a packed crowd can lead to a disorderly conduct citation, and climbing on bus shelters, light poles, or parked cars can lead to a criminal damage charge if something breaks. When an officer orders the crowd to move or clear an area, ignoring that order can turn a celebration into a disorderly conduct or obstruction charge. Cars left in posted no-parking zones along the route can be ticketed or towed.

Enjoy the parade, and let’s get everyone home without a ticket, tow, or a trip to court.

Extra Innings: Talk to a Milwaukee Criminal Defense Lawyer

Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP has represented Wisconsinites since 1968, and we are cheering for the Brew Crew right along with you. If a World Series night ends with a citation, an arrest, or a no-contact order, call 414-271-1440 or contact the firm online to talk through your next steps. We are standing by, and we are ready to go to work for you!

Last reviewed: October 2026

This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship with Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Strangulation and Suffocation Charges in Wisconsin: Why No Visible Injury Still Means a Felony

August 28, 2026/in Criminal Defense/by Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP

Strangulation charges in Wisconsin do not require a visible injury. Wis. Stat. § 940.235 makes it a felony to intentionally impede another person’s breathing or blood circulation by applying pressure on the throat or neck, or by blocking the nose or mouth. No bruising. No marks on the neck. No loss of consciousness. The State does not have to prove any of it.

That surprises almost everyone who gets arrested for it. People expect the case to collapse when the photographs come back clean, and it usually does not. The statute is written around what the hands did, not around what the skin shows an hour later.

Is strangulation a felony in Wisconsin?

Yes. Strangulation and suffocation is always a felony in Wisconsin, and there is no misdemeanor version of the offense. A first charge is a Class H felony. It rises to a Class G felony when the person has a prior conviction under the same statute or a prior conviction for a violent crime listed by statute.

The offense is relatively young. Wisconsin created it through 2007 Wisconsin Act 127, effective April 4, 2008. Before that, this conduct was typically charged as battery or disorderly conduct, often as a misdemeanor. Key points:

Two tiers only, Class H and Class G. There is no aggravated Class F version in Wisconsin, despite material written for other states.
The same act expanded Wisconsin’s dangerous weapon definition to cover a ligature used on the throat, neck, nose, or mouth.
The prior conviction that triggers the Class G tier is an element the jury must find, not a sentencing note.

Can you be charged with strangulation if there are no marks or injuries?

Yes. Wisconsin’s strangulation statute requires proof that breathing or blood circulation was impeded, not proof of injury. A conviction is possible with no bruising, no redness, and no medical treatment. Wisconsin law separately directs police and prosecutors that the absence of visible injury cannot be the only reason to decline an arrest or a charge.

The medical literature is why the statute reads this way. In a review of 300 attempted strangulation cases submitted to the San Diego City Attorney’s Office:

150 of 300 surviving victims, exactly half, had no visible markings to the neck.
Another 35 percent had injuries the reviewers described as very minor.
The authors concluded the seriousness of these assaults was routinely missed as a result.

Wisconsin wrote that finding into policy. Under Wis. Stat. § 968.075(3)(a)1.d., every law enforcement agency’s domestic abuse policy must state that a decision not to arrest may not rest solely on the absence of visible indications of injury. Section 968.075(7)(a)1. imposes the same instruction on district attorney charging policies. Clean photographs are still evidence, and they can matter a great deal next to inconsistencies in the account. They are not the case-ender people often assume.

What does the State have to prove in a strangulation case?

Two elements. Under Wisconsin’s pattern jury instruction, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant impeded the normal breathing or circulation of blood by applying pressure on the throat or neck or by blocking the nose or mouth, and that the defendant did so intentionally.

Wisconsin Criminal Jury Instruction 1255 defines intentionally narrowly: the defendant must have acted with the mental purpose to impede breathing or circulation. Hands that end up near a neck during a struggle are not automatically hands that acted with that purpose. What gets contested:

Where the contact landed, how long it lasted, and whether both people were physically engaged.
Whether the description shifted between the 911 call, the statement at the scene, and a later recorded interview.
Whether the accused person has injuries of their own that the report does not account for.
Whether either party acted in self-defense, which Wisconsin law requires officers to weigh when identifying the predominant aggressor.

What are the penalties for strangulation charges in Wisconsin?

A Class H felony carries up to 6 years and a fine of up to $10,000. A Class G felony carries up to 10 years and a fine of up to $25,000. Wisconsin splits every felony sentence into prison time and supervision, so actual maximum confinement is lower than those headline numbers.

Those maximums come from Wis. Stat. § 939.50(3). What they mean in practice comes from Wis. Stat. § 973.01, and there is a consequence here that most published summaries leave out:

Class H: confinement may not exceed 3 years, extended supervision may not exceed 3 years.
Class G: confinement may not exceed 5 years, extended supervision may not exceed 5 years.
No earned release program. Anyone convicted of a chapter 940 crime is statutorily excluded, and strangulation sits in chapter 940.
No challenge incarceration program, excluded on the same basis.
No reduction for good behavior, and no parole eligibility on a bifurcated sentence.
A mandatory $100 domestic abuse surcharge under Stat. § 973.055(1), which names § 940.235 on its list.

Those two excluded programs are the routes that let some Wisconsin prisoners convert remaining confinement into supervision. Neither is available here, which means a term of confinement on this charge is served as imposed. The surcharge also matters beyond the money: under Wis. Stat. § 939.621, two or more convictions carrying that surcharge within ten years can add up to 2 years to the maximum term on a later case.

What happens in the first 72 hours after a domestic abuse arrest in Wisconsin?

Arrest becomes mandatory when an officer has reasonable grounds to believe a person committed domestic abuse amounting to a crime and continued abuse appears likely, there is evidence of physical injury, or the person is the predominant aggressor. That is why an arrest happens even when the person who called asks police not to make one. What the 72-hour rule actually requires:

No contact directly, and no contact through anyone else. The only exceptions are law enforcement and the attorneys for each side.
Asking a relative or friend to pass along a message is a violation.
An intentional violation carries a fine of up to $10,000 or up to 9 months, or both, and arrest for the violation is itself mandatory.
The alleged victim may lift the requirement, but only by signing a written waiver with the law enforcement agency.
The arrested person must sign an acknowledgment before release. Refusing to sign means not being released.

The word that matters in that fourth item is written. A text message saying it is fine to come home is not a waiver, and acting on one is how a person facing a single felony charge acquires a second one.

Can a strangulation charge be dropped if the alleged victim recants?

Usually not. In Wisconsin, the decision to charge belongs to the district attorney, not to the alleged victim. State law directs that an officer’s arrest decision may not be based on the victim’s consent to a prosecution or on the relationship between the parties, and district attorney policies must reflect the same principle.

Prosecutors build these cases to survive a reluctant or absent complaining witness. Available without live cooperation:

The 911 recording and any body camera footage.
Statements made at the scene before anyone had time to reconsider.
Photographs, medical records, and prior reports involving the same parties.

A recantation becomes one piece of evidence the jury weighs rather than a stop sign. The absence of an arrest at the scene does not close the matter either: where an officer had reasonable grounds and did not arrest, Wisconsin law requires a written report explaining why, sent to the district attorney for a charging decision.

Why do prosecutors and judges treat strangulation so seriously?

Because published research links non-fatal strangulation to later homicide. A case-control study of abused women in the Journal of Emergency Medicine found prior non-fatal strangulation associated with roughly seven-fold odds of later becoming a homicide victim. That research shapes charging decisions, bail arguments, and sentencing recommendations in Wisconsin courtrooms.

The study most often cited is Glass and colleagues, published in 2008, comparing 506 homicide and attempted homicide cases against 427 abused controls:

Odds ratio of 6.70 for becoming an attempted homicide victim.
Odds ratio of 7.48 for becoming a completed homicide victim.
Non-fatal strangulation was reported by 10 percent of abused controls, 45 percent of attempted homicide cases, and 43 percent of homicide cases.

Figures considerably larger than those circulate widely, and some secondary sources inflate them further. The numbers above are what the study reported. It is also a case-control study of women already in abusive relationships, so it measures an association within that population and says nothing about whether any particular defendant poses that risk. For someone facing this charge, the point is that the research is already in the room: expect a higher bail argument than the charge class alone would suggest and a sentencing argument organized around lethality.

Does a strangulation conviction affect gun rights in Wisconsin?

Yes, and in most cases permanently. Because every strangulation conviction in Wisconsin is a felony, it bars firearm possession under state law, and possessing a firearm afterward is itself a Class G felony. A parallel federal prohibition generally applies as well.

Wis. Stat. § 941.29(1m)(a) governs. The practical consequences:

Because § 940.235 has no misdemeanor tier, no version of this charge resolves in a conviction that leaves firearm rights intact.
Section 940.235 appears on the statute’s violent felony list, which can trigger a three-year mandatory minimum on a later firearm possession charge where the statute’s timing conditions are met.
Expungement does not fix it. As the commentary to Wisconsin Criminal Jury Instruction 1343 explains, an expunged conviction is not treated as expunged for the federal firearms disability, and restoration of civil rights does not lift the state prohibition.

Firearm rights are restored only through a gubernatorial pardon or another statutory mechanism that expressly provides that relief. For clients in law enforcement, the military, or private security, this is frequently the consequence that matters more than the sentence.

How quickly does the charging decision happen?

Faster than most people expect. Wisconsin directs district attorney offices to adopt policies under which a charging decision on a reported domestic abuse incident is made no later than two weeks after the district attorney receives notice, absent extraordinary circumstances. The window to influence that decision is short.

That two-week figure is a policy directive rather than a jurisdictional deadline, and a charge filed outside it is not invalid. As a practical matter, it describes how these files move, and in many cases the decision is made before the person arrested has spoken to a lawyer. Before a charge is filed, defense counsel can put information in front of the district attorney that the referral packet does not contain:

The fuller context of the altercation.
Inconsistencies across the successive accounts.
Medical records and photographs of injuries on the accused person.
History between the parties that cuts in a different direction than the report suggests.

Two things protect that window. Do not discuss the incident with investigators without a lawyer present, and do not contact the alleged victim. Both are ordinary advice, and both are routinely ignored in the first 48 hours, usually by people trying to fix the situation.

Talk to a Wisconsin criminal defense lawyer

Strangulation charges in Wisconsin move quickly, carry a felony conviction with no misdemeanor alternative, and reach consequences that outlast any sentence imposed. They are also genuinely contestable, because the intent element is narrow and the accounts are often inconsistent.

Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP has been a trial and litigation firm in Milwaukee since 1968. Our criminal defense team includes former prosecutors and former Wisconsin State Public Defenders who have handled domestic abuse and strangulation cases from both sides. We appear in Milwaukee County Circuit Court and in circuit courts throughout Wisconsin.

If you have been arrested for strangulation or suffocation, or you have reason to believe a report has been made, call 414-271-1440 or send a message through our contact form.

Frequently asked questions

Does the alleged victim have to lose consciousness?

No. The statute requires proof that normal breathing or blood circulation was impeded. It does not require loss of consciousness and sets no minimum duration.

Does the charge apply if I covered someone’s mouth rather than their neck?

Yes. Section 940.235 covers two methods: applying pressure on the throat or neck, and blocking the nose or mouth. There is no requirement that the neck was touched at all.

Can both people be arrested after a domestic incident?

Wisconsin law directs officers away from that outcome. Where an officer identifies a predominant aggressor, the statute provides that it is generally not appropriate to arrest anyone else. The officer must weigh the history between the parties, witness statements, the relative degree of injury, threats of future harm, and whether either party acted in self-defense.

What if we were never married and never lived together?

The strangulation charge does not depend on the relationship. What may not apply is Wisconsin’s domestic abuse framework, which reaches a spouse or former spouse, an adult the person lives with or formerly lived with, and an adult the person has a child in common with. A dating relationship outside those categories affects the mandatory arrest rules, the 72-hour contact prohibition, and the surcharge.

What is the domestic abuse surcharge?

A mandatory $100 charge imposed for each offense on conviction under an enumerated statute, including § 940.235, where the court finds the conduct involved a qualifying domestic relationship. It applies whether or not a fine is ordered.

Last reviewed: August 2026

This page is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading this page or contacting Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP through this website does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every case is different, and prior results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome in any future matter.

What Crimes Have the Longest Sentences in Milwaukee?

July 15, 2026/in Criminal Defense/by Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP

Being charged with a serious felony in Wisconsin changes your life overnight. While every criminal charge should be taken seriously, some offenses carry penalties that can keep someone in prison for decades or even for the rest of their life.

Wisconsin uses a felony classification system that assigns different maximum penalties based on the crime involved. If they believe the circumstances warrant it, prosecutors may also seek sentence enhancements that increase penalties even further.

If you are facing serious criminal charges in 2026, you need an experienced Milwaukee, WI criminal defense attorney right away. At Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP, we represent clients accused of Wisconsin’s most serious criminal offenses.

What Crimes Carry the Longest Prison Sentences in Wisconsin?

Wisconsin classifies felonies from Class A through Class I under Wis. Stat. § 939.50. Class A felonies carry the harshest penalties, while Class I felonies carry the least severe felony penalties.

The longest prison sentences are generally reserved for violent offenses involving death or serious bodily harm.

First-Degree Intentional Homicide

First-degree intentional homicide is Wisconsin’s most serious criminal offense. Under Wis. Stat. § 940.01, a conviction carries a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment.

Unlike many other states, Wisconsin does not have the death penalty. Instead, life imprisonment is the maximum criminal sentence. Depending on the circumstances, a judge may allow the possibility of extended supervision after a specified period, or may order life imprisonment without eligibility for release.

Because the penalties are so severe, these cases often involve extensive investigation, forensic evidence, expert witnesses, and complex legal issues. This all takes a serious criminal defense team with experience and resources.

First-Degree Reckless Homicide

Not every homicide requires proof that someone intended to kill another person. For example, certain fatal car accidents from driving while intoxicated can result in first-degree reckless homicide.

Under Wis. Stat. § 940.02, first-degree reckless homicide involves conduct showing utter disregard for human life. Although it is generally classified as a Class B felony rather than a Class A felony, it can still result in up to 60 years of imprisonment.

Sexual Assault of a Child

Certain child sexual assault offenses also carry extremely lengthy prison sentences. For example, repeated sexual assault of the same child under Wis. Stat. § 948.025 is punishable by varying levels of felony charges. If the child is under 13 years old and the sexual assault causes great bodily harm, the penalty is a Class A felony.

Other offenses involving children carry very long penalties depending on the child’s age, the number of alleged victims, and whether force or great bodily harm is involved.

Armed Robbery and Other Violent Felonies

While offenses like armed robbery do not carry life sentences by themselves, they still expose defendants to decades in prison.

Examples include:

Armed robbery
Kidnapping
First-degree sexual assault
Armed burglary
Aggravated battery causing great bodily harm

The exact sentence depends on the felony classification, the facts of the case, and any applicable sentence enhancements.

Can Sentence Enhancements Increase Prison Time?

Even if the underlying offense has a specific maximum sentence, Wisconsin law allows prosecutors to seek additional penalties under certain circumstances.

Common sentence enhancements include:

Use of a Dangerous Weapon

Under Wis. Stat. § 939.63, using, threatening to use, or possessing a dangerous weapon during the commission of certain crimes can substantially increase the maximum sentence. For example, in the case of a felony crime, the maximum term can be increased by an extra five years.

Habitual Criminality

Wisconsin’s habitual criminality statute, Wis. Stat. § 939.62, allows longer sentences for defendants with certain prior criminal convictions. Depending on the defendant’s criminal history and the current offense, the maximum available sentence may increase significantly.

Crimes Against Certain Victims

Some offenses receive enhanced penalties because of the victim involved, such as crimes committed against children, public servants, and vulnerable adults. Because enhancements can dramatically increase potential prison exposure, they often become a major focus during plea negotiations and trial preparation.

Does Every Serious Charge Result in the Maximum Sentence?

Many people assume that being charged with a serious felony automatically means they will receive the maximum prison sentence. Fortunately, that is not how Wisconsin’s criminal justice system works.

Judges consider numerous factors during sentencing, including:

The seriousness of the offense
The defendant’s prior criminal record
Whether anyone was injured
The defendant’s age and personal history
Acceptance of responsibility
Risk to the community
Rehabilitation prospects

Even in very serious felony cases, experienced defense attorneys work to present mitigating evidence that may allow a lesser sentence even with a conviction.

Can Serious Felony Charges Be Reduced?

As a criminal case develops, prosecutors may discover weaknesses involving:

Witness credibility
Police procedures
Search and seizure issues
DNA evidence
Surveillance footage
Cell phone evidence
Statements made during police interviews

Sometimes these issues lead prosecutors to dismiss certain charges or negotiate reductions to less serious offenses. In other cases, evidence may be excluded because police violated the defendant’s constitutional rights during the investigation.

The earlier an attorney becomes involved, the greater the opportunity to identify these issues before the case progresses.

What Happens After Someone Is Charged With a Serious Felony?

While every case is different, most serious felony cases follow a similar path. After an arrest, the defendant typically makes an initial court appearance where issues such as bail and release conditions are addressed. The prosecution then continues gathering evidence while the defense begins its own investigation.

Over the following months, there are hearings involving discovery, motions to suppress evidence, expert witnesses, and plea negotiations. Some cases resolve through negotiated agreements, while others go to jury trial.

Serious felony cases can take a long time to resolve because of the amount of evidence involved. Some take over a year. During that time, every strategic decision can affect the final outcome.

Contact a Milwaukee, WI Criminal Defense Attorney Today

If you have been charged with a serious felony in Wisconsin, you should get legal advice as soon as possible. The penalties associated with homicide, sexual assault, armed robbery, and other violent crimes can affect the rest of your life.

At Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP, we represent clients facing Wisconsin’s most serious criminal charges. We carefully investigate every case, challenge the prosecution’s evidence whenever possible, and fight to protect our clients’ rights at every stage of the criminal process.

Call 414-271-1440 today to schedule a confidential consultation with an experienced Milwaukee, WI criminal defense attorney.

Wisconsin Passes Law Enhancing Criminal Penalties Against Vulnerable Adults

June 22, 2026/in Criminal Defense/by Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP

On April 2, 2026, Wisconsin enacted 2025 Wisconsin Act 149. This is new legislation that adds onto existing legislation to significantly expand the criminal penalties and procedural protections that apply when the victim of a crime is a vulnerable adult.

The law began as Assembly Bill 19 and extends several protections that previously applied only to elder persons — individuals 60 or older — to a broader category called “adults at risk.” For anyone facing criminal charges in Milwaukee or elsewhere in Wisconsin that allegedly involve a vulnerable adult, this law is directly relevant to your case. Our Milwaukee criminal defense attorneys can explain more.

What Is Wisconsin Act 149?

Wisconsin Act 149 amends several sections of the Wisconsin Statutes to bring adults at risk under many of the same legal protections that have long applied to older adults. The changes affect criminal penalties, battery and sexual assault charges, restraining order procedures, and a court’s ability to freeze a defendant’s assets. The major changes include:

Allowing adults at risk to appear by phone or live video at restraining order hearings rather than in person
Creating a penalty enhancer that increases the maximum prison term for crimes committed against an adult at risk
Expanding the battery statute to cover adults at risk alongside elder persons
Elevating sexual assault against an adult at risk to a first-degree charge when the defendant knew the victim’s status
Authorizing courts to freeze a defendant’s assets when he or she is charged with financial exploitation of an adult at risk

Each of these changes carries serious implications for anyone accused of a crime involving a vulnerable adult in Wisconsin courts.

How Does Wisconsin Law Define an “Adult at Risk”?

The term “adult at risk” is defined in Section 55.01(1e) of the Wisconsin Statutes. In general terms, an adult at risk is someone who is 18 or older and is vulnerable to abuse, neglect, or financial exploitation because of:

A physical or mental condition, or
A developmental disability, or
Some other factor that affects his or her ability to protect himself or herself

This definition is different from, and in addition to, an “elder person,” which simply means anyone 60 or older. Whether a particular person qualifies as an adult at risk requires an evaluation from the prosecutor.

That is important when it comes to how charges are filed and what the prosecution must prove. Whether the alleged victim is truly an adult at risk is one of the first things a defense attorney should examine when a client is charged with a crime.

What Is the Penalty Enhancer Created by Wisconsin Act 149?

Under the amended section 939.623 of the Wisconsin Statutes, if the victim of a crime is an adult at risk or an elder person, the maximum term of prison time for that crime can be increased beyond what the charge would normally allow. This is called a penalty enhancer, which means it does not create a separate crime. Instead, it allows prosecutors to ask for a longer sentence for an existing crime.

One of the most important aspects of this law is that the person who is being charged has to know that the alleged victim was an adult at risk. For elder person victims, the enhancer applies regardless of whether the defendant knew the victim was 60 or older. For adult-at-risk victims, the enhancer only applies if the defendant had actual knowledge that the victim was an adult at risk at the time of the crime.

Prosecutors have to have evidence that the defendant knew the alleged victim was an adult at risk. From a defense perspective, this is a good opportunity for a criminal defense attorney to attack the prosecutor’s case.

How Does Wisconsin Act 149 Change Battery and Sexual Assault Charges?

Before Act 149, the battery enhancement law covered only crimes against elder persons. The new law adds adults at risk to that statute, with the same tiered felony structure that already applied to elder person victims:

Intentionally causing great bodily harm to an adult at risk is now a Class C felony.
Intentionally causing bodily harm is a Class H felony.
Causing bodily harm under circumstances likely to produce great bodily harm is a Class F felony.
Recklessly causing great bodily harm is a Class E felony.
Recklessly causing bodily harm is a Class I felony.

Act 149 also creates a new provision under section 940.225(1)(e) of the Wisconsin Statutes. Under this section, committing what would otherwise be second-degree sexual assault against an adult at risk — when the defendant knew the victim was an adult at risk — is elevated to first-degree sexual assault. First-degree sexual assault is one of the most serious charges in the Wisconsin criminal code and can result in decades in prison.

How Does the New Asset Freezing Provision Work?

Under the amended section 971.109 of the Wisconsin Statutes, prosecutors can now petition a court to freeze a defendant’s assets when he or she is charged with financial exploitation of an adult at risk, not just an elder person as the prior version of the statute allowed. The charge must involve property valued at more than $2,500.

If the court grants the petition, the order can freeze up to 100 percent of the assets allegedly involved in the crime. The defendant is prohibited from selling, transferring, or giving away any of that property without court approval. Banks or third parties holding those assets are bound by the order as well.

These hearings can be held without the defendant present, which means an asset freeze can go into effect even before the defendant is even aware the prosecution filed an asset freeze. If your assets have been frozen under this provision, this can make it hard to hire an attorney or do basic things like pay rent.

Call a Milwaukee Criminal Defense Attorney Today

Wisconsin Act 149 is already changing how prosecutors charge cases involving elderly people and at-risk adults. If you are facing charges that fall under this law, contact a Wisconsin criminal defense lawyer at Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP today at 414-271-1440 to confidentially discuss your situation.

What Happens if Your Lawyer Has Evidence You’re Guilty?

May 20, 2026/in Criminal Defense/by Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP

Many people facing criminal charges worry about what will happen if their attorney learns they are guilty. Some people even panic and fear their lawyer will turn against them or immediately hand them over to prosecutors. Thankfully, that is not how criminal defense works in Wisconsin or anywhere else in the United States.

A Milwaukee criminal defense attorney’s job is not to decide whether a client is morally innocent. Defense lawyers exist to protect their clients’ constitutional rights. They challenge the government’s evidence and make sure the prosecution follows the law. The government still has the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, even if an attorney knows their client probably committed the crime.

That being said, your attorney isn’t your best friend and there are still certain things you should never do with your criminal defense lawyer. One of these things is to give, or try to give, your lawyer evidence that shows you might be guilty.

Can You Tell Your Lawyer You Committed the Crime?

Your conversations with your criminal defense attorney are generally protected by attorney-client privilege. A lawyer cannot normally reveal what you tell them simply because you privately admit guilt. In fact, defense attorneys routinely represent clients who have committed crimes. The legal system is built on the fact that every defendant has the right to a lawyer, whether the client is innocent or not. The government still must follow the Constitution and prove its case.

A lawyer who knows a client is guilty may still:

Challenge unlawful police conduct
Question witnesses
Negotiate plea agreements
Ask for reduced charges
Fight unconstitutional searches
Advocate for fair sentencing

For example, in our last blog, we talked about how the exclusionary rule means that evidence the police find through an illegal search may not be allowed in court. This rule allows a criminal defense attorney to challenge the prosecution, even if the accused person actually committed the crime.

Should You Give Your Lawyer Physical Evidence?

Don’t bring evidence to your attorney unless they tell you to, and definitely don’t ask an attorney to hide incriminating evidence for you. A defense attorney can generally keep what a client says confidential. Physical evidence is different. Lawyers have to follow ethical rules and criminal laws that prevent them from hiding, destroying, or concealing evidence.

If a client gives a lawyer clearly incriminating evidence, the attorney may face difficult legal questions about what to do with that evidence. Never bring drugs, weapons, stolen property, child pornography, or any other evidence to your attorney without talking to them first. Certain evidence, like child pornography, must be turned in to the police. Giving it to an attorney can potentially create legal problems for everyone involved.

Why Can Physical Evidence Create Problems for Defense Attorneys?

Criminal defense lawyers are not allowed to obstruct justice by concealing or destroying evidence. Courts in many jurisdictions have held that attorneys who take possession of clearly incriminating evidence may have obligations to turn it over to authorities or otherwise properly address it under ethical rules.

Defense attorneys often face difficult judgment calls during investigations. Sometimes an item may initially appear potentially helpful or neutral before later proving incriminating after closer review or testing. That is one reason experienced criminal defense attorneys are often extremely cautious about taking possession of physical evidence tied to alleged crimes.

Can a Lawyer Hide or Destroy Evidence to Protect a Client?

Destroying evidence can expose both the client and the attorney to serious criminal consequences.

One widely discussed federal case, United States v. Russell, involves an attorney who destroyed a hard drive containing child pornography after learning about the illegal material. The lawyer later faced criminal charges related to concealing evidence and obstruction issues. The case became a major warning within the legal profession about the dangers of mishandling incriminating evidence.

A defense attorney’s duty to aggressively represent a client does not permit destroying evidence, concealing contraband, or interfering with criminal investigations. A lawyer may lawfully challenge the government’s evidence in court. A lawyer cannot illegally eliminate evidence outside court.

What if I Have Evidence that Could Help My Defense Attorney?

There are some situations where evidence could help build a possible defense. For example, a lawyer investigating a case may realize there is physical evidence that could potentially prove innocence, undermine a witness, or support another defense theory. At first, it may not even be clear whether the evidence helps or hurts the client.

Legal ethics rules recognize that defense attorneys sometimes must investigate evidence thoroughly to provide effective representation. However, this area of law is complicated and fact-specific. That is why criminal defense attorneys often advise clients not to move, hide, alter, or transfer evidence before talking to them first.

Can Your Lawyer Withdraw From the Case if You’re Guilty?

Defense attorneys regularly represent guilty clients. However, lawyers may withdraw in certain situations if a client demands unethical or illegal conduct. For example, a lawyer cannot knowingly:

Present false evidence in court
Allow perjury (lying under oath)
Destroy evidence
Assist criminal conduct
Mislead the court

If a client insists on illegal behavior, the attorney may step back from the case. However, simply admitting guilt privately does not normally prevent a lawyer from continuing to defend the case aggressively and ethically.

Attorney-Client Trust and Your Case

Even though attorneys may face limits regarding physical evidence, attorney-client confidentiality is one of the most important protections you have in criminal defense.

You want your lawyer to give you the best defense possible. For that, they need to be prepared and they need your help. A lawyer who fully understands the facts of a case is in a much better position to understand what approach the prosecution will take. If your case is best served by entering a plea negotiation, your attorney can tell you that. You definitely do not want your lawyer to be surprised at trial by evidence that you could have prepared them for.

Talk to your attorney honestly. They will know how to manage their professional limits while still protecting you.

Call a Wisconsin Criminal Defense Attorney Today

If you are under investigation or facing criminal charges in Wisconsin, you need an attorney who believes that, as far as the state is concerned, you are innocent until they prove you guilty. A Milwaukee criminal defense lawyer at Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP will protect your rights no matter what you’re charged with. Call 414-271-1440 today to confidentially discuss your situation.

Understanding the Exclusionary Rule

May 10, 2026/in Criminal Defense/by Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP

If you have been charged with a crime in Wisconsin, you may have heard the term “exclusionary rule” and wondered what it actually means and whether it could help your case. The exclusionary rule is one of the most powerful defenses in criminal cases, and one of the most important ways attorneys can hold police and the prosecution responsible for misbehavior.

In 2026, any good Wisconsin criminal defense attorney should look carefully at how police got evidence in any given case and whether they followed the rules. Problems with evidence can destroy a prosecution’s case and result in dropped charges or an acquittal. At Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP, we understand the exclusionary rule and use it as just one of many tools in our toolbox for giving our clients the best defense possible.

What Is the Exclusionary Rule?

The U.S. Constitution guarantees important rights to people accused of crimes. One of the most significant of these is the right to be protected from unreasonable searches and seizures. That protection comes from the Fourth Amendment, which generally prevents police from searching a person’s home, car, or belongings without a valid warrant or a legally recognized reason to act without one.

But a right without a real consequence for breaking it is not much of a right at all. That is where the exclusionary rule comes in. The exclusionary rule says that if police find evidence in an illegal search, that evidence cannot be used against you in court. It does not matter how damaging that evidence might be. If it was gathered in violation of your constitutional rights, a judge can throw it out.

The U.S. Supreme Court established the exclusionary rule as it applies to federal cases in Weeks v. United States back in 1914, and it was extended to state cases through Mapp v. Ohio in 1961. Together, these cases provide the foundation for American citizens’ protection from unreasonable search and seizure in every state, including Wisconsin, from both the state and federal government.

What Is the Fruit of the Poisonous Tree?

The exclusionary rule does not stop with just the evidence police find in their initial search. Courts also apply what is known as the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine. This means that any additional evidence discovered as a result of an illegal search is also off the table.

Here is a simple example of how this works: Let’s say the police illegally search a storage unit for drugs without a warrant. During the search, they also find illegal weapons. Under the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine, anything they found in the storage unit could be suppressed. This is because the first illegal search “poisoned” everything that came after it.

This can have a dramatic effect on a criminal case. If the prosecution’s most important evidence gets thrown out, the entire case may fall apart. However, there are some important exceptions to the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine, and you can expect the prosecution to use them if possible.

Why Does the Exclusionary Rule Exist?

Some people don’t understand why a person who might be guilty of a crime should go free just because the police made a mistake. The reason is that the exclusionary rule is not about rewarding the person accused of a crime by letting them get off without being convicted. Instead, it’s about setting important limits on police behavior.

State and federal police officers have an enormous amount of power and resources. If officers knew that illegal evidence could still be used in court, there would be very little reason for them to follow the rules. The rule creates a real cost for unconstitutional searches, which pushes law enforcement to respect people’s rights and do their job fairly and correctly.

However, there are limits even to the protection that the exclusionary rule gives people. For example, in United States v. Leon (1984), the U.S. Supreme Court created a limited exception to the exclusionary rule called the “good faith exception.” Under this exception, evidence may still be used if officers relied in good faith on a search warrant that later turned out to be defective. Courts have recognized other narrow exceptions as well, including the doctrines of inevitable discovery, independent source, attenuation, and more.

These exceptions mean that not every illegal search automatically results in suppressed evidence. That is only part of why having an attorney who understands the details of search and seizure law is so important. Finding out whether the government violated your rights when it looked for evidence against you requires a close look at the details of your case.

Does Consenting to a Search Cancel the Exclusionary Rule?

If you agree to let police search you, your car, or your home, the Fourth Amendment protections largely go away. You can’t later argue that the search was illegal if you gave permission for it to happen.

Unless the police have a warrant, you usually do not have to agree to a search. If they ask, you have the right to refuse. But if an officer asks whether they can search your vehicle or your home and you say yes, that consent is generally treated as a waiver of your Fourth Amendment rights. Anything found during that search can be used against you.

Refusing a search is not the same as being able to prevent one, however. If a police officer has a warrant or believes they have probable cause, they may go forward with the search over your objection. But refusing means your attorney has the ability to challenge whether the officer actually had the legal authority to search. That challenge can become one of the most important parts of your defense.

Call a Milwaukee, WI Criminal Defense Attorney Today

If you believe your rights were violated during a search or arrest, our team can look closely at your case and determine whether the exclusionary rule could be used in your defense. The Milwaukee criminal defense lawyers at Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP are experienced, aggressive when defending our clients’ interests, and know how to fight to have illegal evidence thrown out. Call 414-271-1440 today for a consultation.

Can Police Get a Warrant for My Doorbell Footage?

April 23, 2026/in Criminal Defense/by Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP

If you have a Ring camera, a Nest doorbell, or any other video device mounted outside your home, you may have wondered what happens to that footage if the police come knocking. Can they take it? Can they demand it from the company directly? And what happens if someone shares your footage without your permission?

These are real legal questions that come up constantly in 2026. If you have pressing legal questions about police and doorbell footage, or your video has already ended up somewhere it should not be, you deserve answers from our experienced Milwaukee, WI civil litigation and criminal defense attorneys.

Can Police Get Access to My Doorbell Camera Footage?

Police can access your doorbell camera footage, but how they do it depends on the conditions of each case, who they ask for access, and what legal process they follow.

If police come to you directly and ask for your footage, you have the right to say no. You are not required to hand over your video simply because an officer asks. However, if law enforcement has a valid search warrant, they can make you give them the footage. A warrant must be based on probable cause, meaning police need a legitimate legal reason to believe the footage contains evidence of a crime. This requirement comes from the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which protects people against unreasonable searches and seizures.

The more complicated situation involves police going directly to the camera company instead of to you. Ring, which is owned by Amazon, has faced significant public scrutiny over its law enforcement partnerships. For years, Ring operated a program that allowed police departments to request footage directly from users through a portal called the Neighbors app. In 2022, Ring announced it would no longer allow police to use that portal to make bulk requests for footage. However, law enforcement can still obtain footage directly from Ring by serving the company with a subpoena, court order, or search warrant. They do not have to notify you first.

Here is what that means in plain terms:

If police have a valid warrant, Ring and other companies are legally required to hand over footage they have stored on their servers.
You may not find out this happened until after the fact, if at all.
Cloud-stored footage is particularly vulnerable because it exists on a company’s servers, not just on your device.

This is why understanding your camera’s storage settings matters. Footage stored only on a local device in your home generally requires a warrant directed at you personally. Footage uploaded to the cloud can be obtained from the company directly.

Can Police Share My Doorbell Footage Without My Permission?

Once the police have your doorbell footage, either by asking you directly or by going through the camera company, you have little control over what happens to it next. Police can generally share evidence they have lawfully obtained with prosecutors, other agencies, and in some cases the public, without asking you first. This might include news organizations, which in turn may upload it all over the internet.

If your footage becomes part of a criminal investigation or court proceeding, it could end up in documents or hearings that are part of the public record. There are also situations where footage obtained by police has been leaked or shared informally, outside of any official process. This brings up serious legal and civil rights questions. If you believe your footage was obtained or shared improperly, speaking with an attorney is the most important step you can take.

What Are My Rights If My Doorbell Footage Is Shared Without My Permission?

Doorbell camera footage being shared without permission is a situation more people are dealing with as doorbell cameras become standard across the country. If your footage was shared without your consent, whether by an individual, the police, or even a company, you may have legal recourse depending on how it was shared and what it captured.

When is it Illegal to Share Someone Else’s Doorbell Footage?

There are situations where sharing doorbell footage can cross a legal line:

Sharing footage that captures private activity inside someone’s home, even if the camera is mounted outside, can raise serious privacy concerns under both state and federal law.
If footage is shared in a way that damages someone’s reputation and the content is false or misleading, defamation claims may apply.
If a company shares your footage in a way that violates its own terms of service or privacy policy, you may have grounds for a civil claim against that company.

If any of these situations have happened to you, call one of our attorneys right away at 414-271-1440.

What to Do If Your Footage Has Gone Viral

If video you appear in has been shared without your permission and has spread online, take action as soon as possible. The longer the footage circulates, the harder it becomes to contain.

Document as much information as you can find. Take screenshots of where the footage is posted, who shared it, and when.
Do not confront anyone directly or post about it publicly. You can easily get yourself in trouble without realizing it.
Contact the platform where the footage is posted and submit a formal takedown request. Most major platforms have privacy violation reporting tools.

Even if you aren’t sure you want to take action, speak with an attorney as soon as possible. A civil rights lawyer can assess whether your privacy rights were violated, whether you have a claim against the person or company that shared the footage, and what options you have.

What to Do if You’re Facing Legal Threats for Sharing Doorbell Footage

Legal threats over shared doorbell camera footage can come from several directions:

A private person may claim their privacy was violated.
A law enforcement agency may claim that sharing the footage interfered with an investigation or violated a court order.
A person who appears in the footage may pursue a civil claim arguing that the distribution caused them harm, particularly if the video went viral or was shared in a context meant to embarrass or damage their reputation.

If you shared doorbell footage, whether it was your own camera or someone else’s, and you are now facing legal threats, taking the right steps now can make a significant difference in how things unfold.

Stop Sharing the Footage

If it is still posted anywhere you control, take it down right away. This does not erase liability that may already exist, but it demonstrates good faith and prevents the situation from getting worse.

Don’t Destroy Evidence

Do not delete anything from your own devices without speaking to an attorney first. Deleting evidence after you are aware of a legal threat can create a separate legal problem called spoliation, which means the destruction of evidence relevant to a legal proceeding.

Talk to an Attorney Before You Respond

Do not respond to any legal correspondence, demand letters, or law enforcement inquiries on your own. Anything you say can be used against you. What seems like an innocent explanation can complicate your defense.

Call a Milwaukee, Wisconsin Civil Rights Attorney Today

If your doorbell footage was shared without your permission, if law enforcement has requested your video, or if you believe your privacy rights have been violated, you need answers. Contact a Wisconsin criminal defense and civil rights lawyer today by calling Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP at 414-271-1440. Our firm has the knowledge and resources to protect your rights and fight for the outcome you deserve.

Exonerated Compensation Reform Bills Are Once Again Pending Before the Legislature

January 27, 2026/in Criminal Defense/by Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP

Ray Dall’Osto testifying before Senate Judiciary Committee in support of SB 577 on Dec. 17, 2025.

GRGB and its Milwaukee criminal defense team lawyers have long been involved in efforts to obtain the release of wrongfully convicted persons and help them seek and obtain compensation for wrongful incarceration. These efforts include not only direct representation in court with postconviction motions and appeals, but also representing exonerees with claims for exonerated compensation and joint efforts with the Wisconsin Innocence Project to obtain the release of wrongfully convicted individuals.

However, being exonerated of a crime is just the beginning. Upon release, sometimes after decades of wrongful imprisonment, exonerees are left with little or no resources to rely on as they re-enter society. Over a century ago, Wisconsin became the first state to pass laws to compensate individuals who were wrongly convicted, but those laws have not been updated in decades. Now Wisconsin’s limits on compensation are the lowest of any such statute in the nation.

Former Wisconsin Innocence Project Director Keith Finley provided detailed testimony in support of SB 577

Previous Exonerated Compensation Reform Bills in Wisconsin

Exonerated compensation reform bills were introduced in the Wisconsin Legislature in the 2015 and 2017 legislative sessions, and received favorable bipartisan support in committees in both the Assembly and Senate. Unfortunately, these bills never received a final up-and-down vote in both chambers.

Attorney Keith Findley, director of the Wisconsin Innocence Project, and GRGB attorney, Ray Dall’Osto on behalf of the State Bar of Wisconsin, both worked hard on, lobbied, and testified on the previous reform bills. Both Findley and Dall’Osto once again appeared and testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee on December 17, 2025, on newly-introduced exonerated compensation reform bills. You can read Ray Dall’Osto’s testimony here and here.

Introduction of Senate Bill 577 / Assembly Bill 583 Raising Exoneree Compensation Caps

Sen. Van Wanggaard (R – Racine) and Rep. Jessie Rodriguez (R – Oak Creek), aiming to ensure better justice for exonerees, recently introduced Senate Bill 577 / Assembly Bill 583. The State Bar of Wisconsin’s Board of Governors supports their effort to fairly compensate those wrongfully convicted for the time and freedom they lost. Both Sen. Wanggaard and Rep. Rodriguez gave heartfelt testimony in support of passage of SB 577 at the December Judiciary Committee hearing. SB 577 was approved by the Judiciary Committee on January 12, 2026.

SB 577’s most notable change is to increase the annual and lifetime caps for compensation that exonerees can receive, from $5,000 per year and $25,000 per lifetime, to $50,000 for each year of wrongful imprisonment with a $1 million cap. In addition, exonerees could be eligible for health insurance for each year imprisoned, with a five-year maximum.

Exonerees may also seek transition assistance from the Department of Corrections, and request that records related to the case be sealed. The bill would also create a timelier process for hearing and deciding compensation claims, and not having exonerees go through the cumbersome process of introduction of a private bill once the Claims Board has made its recommendation for compensation.

It is hoped that the leadership in the Legislature finally allows full votes to be taken, so that critically necessary exonerated compensation reform finally gets enacted in 2026. Ray Dall’Osto urges you to contact your state legislator now to ask them to vote “yes” on SB 577 and AB 583. Your state legislators’ email addresses can be found at www.wisdc.org.

Contact GRGB’s Outstanding Milwaukee Criminal Defense Attorneys

If you have questions for Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP’s Milwaukee criminal defense attorneys about exoneration of the wrongfully convicted or exonerated compensation, or you need representation in criminal trials or appeals, contact firm attorneys Jason Luczak, Nicole Masnica, Adam Schleis, Andrew Flood, or Raymond Dall’Osto.

Call us today at 414-271-1440 to learn how we can serve you.

5 Property Crimes You May Not Know Are Felonies

December 30, 2025/in Criminal Defense/by Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP

Most people charged with property crimes in Wisconsin are not career criminals. Many are college students, young adults, or people who have never been in trouble before. Sometimes the crime stems from a stupid decision at a party. Sometimes it is a misunderstanding between friends. Sometimes it is a prank that went too far.

If you are a parent reading this, you may be panicked and confused. If you are a young adult reading this, you may be scared and embarrassed. These reactions are normal. Many property crimes are charged against people who never meant to cause harm and sometimes didn’t even know they were committing a crime. Nevertheless, these cases matter, and they need to be taken seriously.

Data from the National Conference of State Legislatures suggests that roughly one in three adults in the United States will be arrested or charged with a crime at some point in their lives. Most of those people are not violent offenders. Many are first-time defendants facing property charges. If you find yourself unexpectedly belonging to this group, don’t panic. Instead, contact a Wisconsin criminal defense attorney at Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP so we can explain your options.

Below are five property crimes that often surprise people when they learn they can be charged as felonies under Wisconsin law.

Is Shoplifting Really a Felony in Wisconsin?

Shoplifting can be a felony depending on the value involved and the circumstances.

Under Wisconsin Statute 943.20, theft becomes a felony when the value of the property exceeds certain thresholds. Retail theft involving items worth $2,500 or more can be charged as a felony, even if it happened at a single store and even if each of the items wasn’t particularly valuable by itself.

This is where people get caught off guard. Loss prevention teams often track repeat behavior. What feels like a one-time mistake may actually be part of a documented pattern. Stores may wait to involve law enforcement until the value adds up.

Felony theft convictions can carry prison time and significant fines, even when no force or violence was involved. Felonies also stay on your criminal record forever and can affect your life in important ways. Work closely with a skilled criminal defense attorney if you are facing felony theft charges.

Can Using a Friend’s Credit Card Turn Into a Felony?

Using someone else’s credit card without permission is treated very seriously in Wisconsin. Under Wisconsin Statute 943.41, credit card fraud includes using a card without authorization, even if the card belongs to a friend, roommate, or romantic partner. It does not matter if the cardholder originally shared the card number for something else, or if the charges were intended to be paid back later.

These cases often start as personal disputes. A relationship ends; a roommate wants revenge over a silly college dispute; a parent reviews a statement with unexpected charges. What began as something that didn’t seem like a big deal suddenly becomes a criminal investigation.

Depending on the amount charged, using someone else’s credit card can be a felony and may carry prison time and restitution orders.

Is Returning Something You Didn’t Buy a Crime?

Returning items you did not buy, including items you found or items taken from another location, can be charged as retail theft or fraud under Wisconsin law. Stores treat this as a form of theft because you are receiving money or credit for property you had no right to return.

Retailers often have sophisticated systems that track returns across locations. Once flagged, prior returns may be reviewed, not just the most recent one. If the total value involved crosses felony thresholds, charges can escalate quickly.

Is Using Someone Else’s Venmo or Apple Pay a Felony?

Using Venmo, Apple Pay, PayPal, or other digital payment accounts without permission is treated similarly to the unauthorized use of a financial instrument like a check or a credit card. Even if the account owner is a friend or family member, not having their direct permission matters.

These cases often arise from shared phones, saved payment methods, or casual access among friends. But prosecutors focus on authorization and intent, not relationship history. When the amounts involved are large enough, felony charges and prison exposure are possible.

Can Breaking Into a House as a Prank Be a Crime?

This is one of the most serious and misunderstood property crimes. Under Wisconsin Statute 943.10, burglary is a felony. Entering a home or building without permission, even as a prank or dare, can qualify as burglary if you intended to commit a crime. Toilet papering, drawing on the windows or walls, and stealing worthless personal objects are all crimes. Even if you don’t succeed in committing a crime, simply meaning to is enough to get you in major trouble. If people are inside the home at the time, the charges and penalties increase significantly.

Alcohol, peer pressure, and bad judgment do not excuse the offense. Prosecutors take these cases seriously because of the risk involved, even when no one was hurt. Burglary convictions can carry years of prison time and long-term consequences.

Why Nonviolent Property Crimes Still Carry Severe Penalties

Many people assume that nonviolent means “not a big deal.” If you didn’t threaten anyone (and probably can’t imagine yourself threatening someone), you may be surprised by how serious the charges against you are.

Wisconsin law does not necessarily make the distinction between a prank, bad judgement, and someone with harmless intentions.

Nonviolent property crimes can still result in:

Felony convictions on your record
Prison or jail sentences
Thousands of dollars in fines and restitution
Damage to education, careers, and professional licensing
Immigration consequences for non-citizens

It is also important to understand that paying the money back does not automatically make the case go away. Prosecutors decide whether to file or dismiss charges, not the victim.

The good news is that many first-time defendants in Wisconsin may be eligible for diversion programs, deferred prosecution, or reduced charges. These options depend heavily on how early a defense attorney gets involved and how the case is handled from the start.

Call a Milwaukee, WI Criminal Defense Attorney

If you or your child is facing a property crime charge, you need to take it seriously, even if the situation feels embarrassing or blown out of proportion. A Milwaukee criminal defense lawyer with Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP can explain the possible penalties. Together, we can work to reduce the long-term impact on your or your child’s future. Call us at 414-271-1440 and let us help you.

When Your Child’s Bad Decisions Land You in Criminal Trouble

October 8, 2025/in Criminal Defense/by Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP

For many parents, watching a child grow into independence is thrilling and terrifying at the same time. You hope they make good decisions, learn from mistakes, and get through adolescence and early adulthood with care.

But sometimes, even well-intentioned parents find themselves facing legal consequences because of their children’s reckless or illegal actions. In Milwaukee, this can happen in cases as seemingly trivial as a minor taking alcohol to share with friends, a teenager joyriding in a parent’s car, or an adult child misusing prescription medications from the home.

If you are a high-net-worth or high-profile parent dealing with criminal exposure tied to your child’s behavior, you absolutely must understand how the law views parental responsibility, what consequences you may face, and how best to navigate this challenging situation.

You are not alone, and there are ways to respond without compounding the problem. At Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP, our Wisconsin criminal defense lawyers work with parents facing liability for their children’s actions. Call us today.

Parental Responsibility for Juvenile Crime in Wisconsin

Wisconsin law holds parents accountable in certain circumstances for the acts of their minor children. The exact scope of liability depends on the child’s age, the specific crime, and whether the parent was complicit or merely negligent.

For example, giving alcohol to a minor, or failing to keep it out of a minor’s hands, can trigger criminal or civil liability. Similarly, if a parent’s inaction or negligence allows a child access to prescription medications, drugs, or a vehicle, the parent could be charged alongside, or even instead of, the child in some cases.

The principle behind this legal framework is twofold. First, the law seeks to protect the public by incentivizing parents to supervise and control access to dangerous items. Second, it recognizes that children may lack the judgment or maturity to fully understand the risks of their actions. In essence, parents are expected to establish reasonable safeguards and take responsibility for creating a safe environment.

Common Scenarios Where Parents Can Be Liable for a Child’s Actions

In Milwaukee, high-profile households are not immune to the legal consequences of adolescent or young adult misbehavior and may even face increased scrutiny for the mistakes a child makes. Some typical situations include:

Alcohol and parties: A minor takes alcohol from the home and gives it to friends. Even if the parent did not pour the drinks or know the exact plan, failing to secure alcohol can result in charges.
Prescription medications or recreational drugs: Teenagers or adult children access medications or illicit substances from the home. Parents may face legal scrutiny if there was inadequate oversight or intentional facilitation.
Vehicles and joyrides: A teenager or adult child takes a car without permission, leading to traffic violations, injuries, or property damage. If a parent knowingly allowed access or left keys knowing a child might take them, liability can extend to the parent.

In each scenario, both the parent and the child face consequences, though the severity and nature differ depending on age, prior record, and specific facts.

Consequences for Parents when Kids Commit Crimes

Legal consequences for parents may include fines, probation, or even jail time in more serious or repeated cases. Beyond the criminal system, parents may also face civil liability for damages caused by the child. For example, if a child joyrides in a parent’s vehicle and causes an accident, the parent’s insurance or personal assets may be at risk.

For children, the consequences can vary dramatically based on age and prior history. Minors may be subject to juvenile court proceedings, including community service, probation, or mandatory counseling.

Adult children can face criminal charges independently, ranging from misdemeanors for property damage or minor theft to felonies for serious offenses. Parents often wrestle with the emotional challenge of seeing a child penalized, while also contending with the practical ramifications to their own record, finances, and reputation.

Underage Drinking at Homecoming and Prom House Parties

Many savvy parents know that their kids are going to drink alcohol at house parties and afterparties during Homecoming and Prom season. Working under this assumption, these parents often prefer to have the kids party at their own home, rather than out with friends at much greater risk of DUIs or other alcohol-related accidents.

But this does not always go according to plan. Local police know high school dance night schedules and are on the lookout for house parties and rowdy teenagers. Nosy or frustrated neighbors may also call the police on a houseparty that is too loud or out of hand.

If you are facing criminal charges for allowing minors to drink at your home or on your property, you are not alone. Wisconsin law strictly prohibits adults from knowingly allowing underage drinking, even if you believed the situation was safe or supervised. Adults who provide or fail to prevent access to alcohol for anyone under 21 can face steep fines, possible jail time, and a lasting criminal record.

How Much Ownership Over a Crime Should Parents Let Kids Take?

One of the most difficult questions for parents in these situations is how much ownership to assign to the child for their misdeeds. Legally and emotionally, this is a delicate balance. On the one hand, parents may feel guilt or responsibility because they provided access to the object, substance, or vehicle. On the other hand, allowing the child to fully own the consequences can be crucial to teaching accountability.

A measured approach often works best. Parents may want to clearly communicate that while the home and resources are provided for safety and support, misuse of those privileges carries real-world consequences. This may mean allowing the child to face fines, probation, or court requirements for their actions, while shielding them from more severe parental exposure where possible.

Taking too much ownership can reduce the child’s understanding of responsibility; taking too little can unnecessarily endanger the parent’s legal or financial position, as well as the child’s. Working closely with a criminal defense attorney in Milwaukee ensures that both parental liability and the child’s accountability are appropriately managed.

Practical Steps for Parents Facing Criminal Exposure

If you are a parent in Milwaukee or elsewhere in Wisconsin dealing with potential criminal exposure due to a child’s behavior, several steps can help protect you and your family:

Find a good lawyer immediately: A skilled criminal defense attorney can evaluate your specific situation, advise you on potential liability, and communicate with authorities if charges are filed.
Secure dangerous items: Alcohol, prescription medications, firearms, and vehicles should be stored safely. Taking proactive measures can help you make a good case for yourself and help prevent further incidents.
Document supervision and policies: Write down your parental rules and supervision measures. Documentation can support your defense when questions come up about your culpability.
Address the child’s behavior responsibly: Engage in counseling, restitution agreements, or other corrective actions that show the court your family is taking the matter seriously.

Contact a Milwaukee, WI High-Profile Criminal Defense Attorney for Parents Facing Criminal Charges

If you are a parent facing potential criminal exposure because of your child’s actions, you need to be fast and smart in taking action. Our team at Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP provides compassionate, experienced guidance for high-profile families going through these complex cases. We help you understand your rights, protect your interests, and ensure both you and your child are treated fairly under the law.

Call a Wisconsin juvenile criminal defense attorney at 414-271-1440 to schedule your consultation with Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP. Our team will listen to your concerns, explain your options, and guide you through the legal process with clarity and care.