Two Rivers Criminal Lawyer, Wisconsin

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-814-6700

Member Representative

Call me for fastest results!
800-814-6700

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-814-6700

By submitting this request, I authorize you to forward my information to multiple potential lawyers and I agree to your Terms of Use and Privacy Policy including the Consent to Receive Automated Phone Calls, Emails and Texts. Information you provide is not privileged or confidential.


Ronald A Kaminski

Construction, Environmental Law, Criminal, Corporate, Lawsuit & Dispute
Status:  Suspended *Status is reviewed annually. For latest information visit here           Licensed:  56 Years

Eric R. Pangburn

Criminal, Bankruptcy & Debt, Litigation, Bankruptcy
Status:  In Good Standing *Status is reviewed annually. For latest information visit here           

Adam J. Snavely

Criminal
Status:  In Good Standing *Status is reviewed annually. For latest information visit here           Licensed:  21 Years

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-814-6700

Member Representative

Call me for fastest results!
800-814-6700

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-814-6700

By submitting this request, I authorize you to forward my information to multiple potential lawyers and I agree to your Terms of Use and Privacy Policy including the Consent to Receive Automated Phone Calls, Emails and Texts. Information you provide is not privileged or confidential.

Lawyer.com

TIPS

Lawyer.com can help you easily and quickly find Two Rivers Criminal Lawyers and Two Rivers Criminal Law Firms. Refine your search by specific Criminal practice areas such as DUI-DWI, Expungement, Felony, Misdemeanor, RICO Act, White Collar Crime, Traffic and Juvenile Law matters.

LEGAL TERMS

CRIMINAL CASE

A lawsuit brought by a prosecutor employed by the federal, state or local government that charges a person with the commission of a crime.

MCNAGHTEN RULE

The earliest and most common test for criminal insanity, in which a criminal defendant is judged legally insane only if he could not distinguish right from wron... (more...)
The earliest and most common test for criminal insanity, in which a criminal defendant is judged legally insane only if he could not distinguish right from wrong at the time he committed the crime. For example, a delusional psychotic who believed that his assaultive acts were in response to the will of God would not be criminally responsible for his acts.

PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE

One of the most sacred principles in the American criminal justice system, holding that a defendant is innocent until proven guilty. In other words, the prosecu... (more...)
One of the most sacred principles in the American criminal justice system, holding that a defendant is innocent until proven guilty. In other words, the prosecution must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, each element of the crime charged.

BURDEN OF PROOF

A party's job of convincing the decisionmaker in a trial that the party's version of the facts is true. In a civil trial, it means that the plaintiff must convi... (more...)
A party's job of convincing the decisionmaker in a trial that the party's version of the facts is true. In a civil trial, it means that the plaintiff must convince the judge or jury 'by a preponderance of the evidence' that the plaintiff's version is true -- that is, over 50% of the believable evidence is in the plaintiff's favor. In a criminal case, because a person's liberty is at stake, the government has a harder job, and must convince the judge or jury beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty.

CRIMINAL INSANITY

A mental defect or disease that makes it impossible for a person to understand the wrongfulness of his acts or, even if he understands them, to ditinguish right... (more...)
A mental defect or disease that makes it impossible for a person to understand the wrongfulness of his acts or, even if he understands them, to ditinguish right from wrong. Defendants who are criminally insane cannot be convicted of a crime, since criminal conduct involves the conscious intent to do wrong -- a choice that the criminally insane cannot meaningfully make. See also irresistible impulse; McNaghten Rule.

IMPEACH

(1) To discredit. To impeach a witness' credibility, for example, is to show that the witness is not believable. A witness may be impeached by showing that he h... (more...)
(1) To discredit. To impeach a witness' credibility, for example, is to show that the witness is not believable. A witness may be impeached by showing that he has made statements that are inconsistent with his present testimony, or that he has a reputation for not being a truthful person. (2) The process of charging a public official, such as the President or a federal judge, with a crime or misconduct and removing the official from office.

NOLO CONTENDERE

A plea entered by the defendant in response to being charged with a crime. If a defendant pleads nolo contendere, she neither admits nor denies that she committ... (more...)
A plea entered by the defendant in response to being charged with a crime. If a defendant pleads nolo contendere, she neither admits nor denies that she committed the crime, but agrees to a punishment (usually a fine or jail time) as if guilty. Usually, this type of plea is entered because it can't be used as an admission of guilt if a civil case is held after the criminal trial.

VENIREMEN

People who are summoned to the courthouse so that they may be questioned and perhaps chosen as jurors in trials of civil or criminal cases.

BATTERY

A crime consisting of physical contact that is intended to harm someone. Unintentional harmful contact is not battery, no mater how careless the behavior or how... (more...)
A crime consisting of physical contact that is intended to harm someone. Unintentional harmful contact is not battery, no mater how careless the behavior or how severe the injury. A fist fight is a common battery; being hit by a wild pitch in a baseball game is not.

SAMPLE LEGAL CASES

State v. Kramer

... Id. ¶ 11 A primary question the court of appeals addressed was whether evidence of Wagner's subjective belief that criminal activity might be taking place operated to preclude his conduct from coming within the scope of his community caretaker function. Id., ¶ 13. ...

State v. Harris

... I. Did the State violate Wis. Stat. § 971.23(1) (the criminal discovery statute) or the ... Stat. § 971.23(1) (the criminal discovery statute) by failing to disclose timely the defendant's request to put on a particular pair of pants? If so, was the defendant prejudiced by the violation? III. ...

State v. Schaefer

... 2 After permitting Schaefer's interlocutory appeal, the court of appeals certified the following question to this court: "Does a criminal defendant have a subpoena right to obtain and copy police investigation reports and nonprivileged materials prior to the preliminary hearing ...

© 2025 LAWYER.COM INC.

Use of this website constitutes acceptance of Lawyer.com’s Terms of Use, Email, Phone, & Text Message and Privacy Policies.