Skip to main content
Steven H. Fagan
Avvo
Pro

Steven Fagan’s Legal Cases

27 total

  • People of the State of Illinois vs. GL

    Practice Area:
    DUI & DWI
    Date:
    Dec 08, 2005
    Outcome:
    DUI and license suspension dismissed pre-trial.
    Description:
    GL was speeding in broad daylight. The Morton Grove police officer stopped GL and obtained an admission of drinking. It was 10:30am. GL wobbled out of the car, performed all requested field sobriety tests (badly), and then agreed to submit to preliminary breath test on the street pre-arrest which demonstrated a BrAC of 0.21. GL was arrested and brought to the police station in handcuffs. Seeking to be polite and cooperative, GL answered the officer's every question honestly. The officer requested a breath test, and GL again obliged, producing a 0.22 reading this time for good measure. What seemed like a terrible case became far more interesting when it was revealed that the officer failed to comply with important procedures in place to insure not only fairness to GL, but to improve officer safety. The Court watched in disbelief as the officer led GL out of the line of sight of his in-car video camera to perform the (now secret) field sobriety testing. All performance tests were excluded as a result. The clincher came when it was revealed that the officer failed to follow procedures meant to insure the reliability of the PBT (portable breath test) device, and that result was excluded as well. With exceedingly little left to defend against an attack on the legality of the arrest, the State's Attorney was reduced to proving a speeding ticket.
  • People of the State of Illinois v MM

    Practice Area:
    DUI & DWI
    Date:
    Oct 27, 2008
    Outcome:
    DUI dismissed for a fine on a speeding ticket
    Description:
    MM was stopped for speeding, put through the paces of extensive physical field sobriety testing, and then, based on his sub-par performance of those tests, was arrested for DUI. An hour later at the police station, his breath alcohol content registered at a 0.073. Although the legal limit in Illinois is 0.08 or above, the State chose to charge MM anyway based on two arguments: 1) his poor performance on the field sobriety tests, and 2) the argument that his blood actually contained even more alcohol an hour earlier when driving. What the prosecution did not realize is that MM is an inappropriate candidate for field sobriety testing. The NHTSA training received by the officer requires an appropriate test subject, and MM had a degenerating hip which hindered his every movement and causes him pain constantly, thus making the testing unreliable. The officer was also trained to ask about physical limitations prior to administering tests, but in this case, he did not. To make matters far worse for MM, he held a license from another state which would be revoked after even the lightest possible DUI sentence in Illinois. This is despite the fact that Illinois would not have suspended or revoked his privileges if he were licensed in this state. Additionally, MM had a CDL. Had he been found guilty of DUI, no matter the sentence, his CDL would have been canceled for one year, and he'd be out of a job. Based on medical and scientific information we provided to the State, they were convinced that MM was no danger to the public, and agreed to dismiss the charges in exchange for a plea to the only offense MM actually did commit - speeding.
  • People of the State of Illinois vs. WK

    Practice Area:
    DUI & DWI
    Date:
    Dec 02, 2004
    Outcome:
    Probation and work release instead of prison time
    Description:
    WK had a bad enough history that the State's Attorney of DuPage county charged him with a felony DUI based only on his record. His attorney, known for taking high profile cases in DuPage county, told him to take the deal that would have landed him in prison for no less than 62 days, and possibly up to one year. After hearing this, WK decided he needed someone to take a fresh look at the case and hired Fagan, Fagan & Davis. We filed, and pursued, certain pre-trial motions that revealed to the Judge and the State that the case was not quite as solid as it first appeared. After the motion, the State reduced their offer slightly. Not satisfied, but fully aware that he was unlikely to prevail at trial, WK agreed to "blind plea" the case and put the sentence fully in the hands of the Judge. After hearing our argument, the Judge agreed that a sentence of probation coupled with treatment and 14 days of work release confinement would suffice. Needless to say, WK was ecstatic, and because of the work release program, he got to keep his job.
  • People of the State of Illinois vs. KJ

    Practice Area:
    DUI & DWI
    Date:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Outcome:
    Not Guilty DUI, Suspension rescinded and dismissed
    Description:
    KJ was stopped for speeding and after admitting to consuming alcohol, she submitted to the City of Matteson police officer's request to perform field sobriety tests. After he improperly instructed her in how to do the tests the wrong way, then improperly administered those tests, the officer improperly graded KJ's tests as failures. He arrested her. KJ absolutely refused to consider the State's offer and demanded hearing on her petition to restore her driving privileges and demanded trial. The Judge found KJ not guilty and dismissed and rescinded her license suspension.
  • People of the State of Illinois vs. Paul G. Wouk

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Date:
    Oct 25, 2000
    Outcome:
    Denial of Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Sustained
    Description:
    In a pre-trial hearing, the circuit court had held that the complaining witness failed to meet her burden in establishing the basis for issuance of an order of protection sought in conjunction with the Defendant's criminal case. In that petition, the complaining witness was represented by the State's Attorney of Cook County. In the lower court, Mr. Wouk's attorney argued that this decision, based on the same allegations contained in the criminal complaint and having the same parties, required dismissal. The basis of that motion to dismiss was that the standard required in the petition for order of protection was a far lower standard than the prosecution would face in their task of proving the criminal charges. This concept is called Collateral Estoppel. The lower court denied that motion, and the Mr. Would was found guilty at trial. Attorney Steven H. Fagan of Fagan, Salon & Associates appealed on behalf of Mr. Wouk, and eventually presented oral argument before the Appellate Court. The Court essentially agreed that all existing required tests had been met to enforce the rule of Collateral Estoppel, but that cases of alleged domestic violence require a new, additional test regarding the public policy concerns in such a case. The Court upheld the conviction and denied Mr. Wouk's petition for rehearing.
  • People of the State of Illinois vs. KM

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Date:
    Nov 24, 2008
    Outcome:
    Not Guilty on all charges
    Description:
    KM was charged with two criminal offenses punishable by up to a year in jail each - Reckless Driving, and Leaving the Scene of an Accident. The State refused to consider any negotiation, and wanted convictions in both cases. KM would lose his license if convicted based on his history. Since that wasn't an option for KM, we proceeded to trial by Judge. The Judge returned a verdict of not guilty on both counts.
  • People of the State of Illinois vs. Chester S. Dudczak

    Practice Area:
    DUI & DWI
    Date:
    May 03, 1999
    Outcome:
    Lower Court ruling Affirmed - case dismissed
    Description:
    A successful pre-trial motion in the Kane County Circuit Court eliminated any key evidence which would have allowed the State's Attorney to proceed to trial. They appealed the Court's ruling. The Appellate Court affirmed the decision of the lower Court, and the State's Attorney was left with no choice but the dismissal of the charges.
  • People v W.M. (name withheld)

    Practice Area:
    DUI & DWI
    Date:
    Mar 04, 2011
    Outcome:
    DUI dismissed
    Description:
    Improper lane usage and changing lanes without signaling led to a DUI arrest in Cook county coupled with transportation of open alcohol. W.M. had a prior DUI offense, and if convicted, would be unable to drive for over a year. After multiple unsuccessful attempts to obtain evidence, we filed a motion seeking to bar testimony related to this evidence. Initially, the Court denied the motion. Rather than give up then, we asked the Court to reconsider based on new case law which agreed with our argument, and the motion was granted. This led to a successful motion to dismiss the DUI and Illegal transportation of open Alcohol charges.
  • People v. Defendant (name withheld)

    Practice Area:
    DUI & DWI
    Date:
    May 03, 2011
    Outcome:
    Finding of Not Guilty as to DUI after trial
    Description:
    Our client was unfortunate enough to have rear-ended a family of three, causing massive damage to both vehicles and injury to multiple passengers. Six squad cars from two different police cars and emergency personnel were on the scene quickly. Our client had the odor of alcohol on his breath, and the officer asked him to perform Standardized Field Sobriety Tests, which he agreed to do, and proceeded to fail in the officer's opinion. Our client was arrested and charged with DUI. The State fought hard to prevent the Defense request for a full-color booking photo and information about video from any squad car. After a lengthy fight, the photo was tendered showing a large bruise on the face of our client indicating a head trauma. Ultimately, it also was determined that although five of the squad cars which responded were equipped with video, none recorded our client's Field Sobriety Tests. Our client had a prior offense and if convicted would lose his driving privileges and faced the possibility of jail time.
  • People of the State of Illinois v. A.H. (name withheld)

    Practice Area:
    Domestic Violence
    Date:
    Apr 29, 2011
    Outcome:
    Case dismissed.
    Description:
    Our client, already awaiting sentencing on another matter, was arrested for Domestic Battery, Resisting Arrest and Possession of Cannabis. The police had responded to a call from a concerned third-party. Our client faced significant jail time in both this case and his pending sentencing if found guilty.