Most DUI defendants in DuPage County approach their case with no clear method for evaluating their defense strengths. They miss critical opportunities to identify winning strategies. They focus resources on the wrong areas.

‍

This represents one of the most costly mistakes in DUI defense. Without proper case assessment, defendants often accept unnecessarily harsh plea deals. They pursue expensive defense strategies that have little chance of success. Meanwhile, they completely overlook their strongest defense opportunities.

‍

Professional defense attorneys use systematic case analysis to identify the most promising defense strategies. They put resources where they'll have maximum impact. This same framework can help you understand your case strengths. You can make informed decisions about plea negotiations versus trial. You can make sure your defense efforts focus on your best opportunities for success.

‍

When you don't understand your case's strengths and weaknesses, you can't effectively participate in defense decisions. You can't evaluate attorney recommendations. You can't make informed choices about accepting plea offers versus going to trial.

‍

In this comprehensive case analysis guide, you'll receive:

‍

• A systematic 20-question assessment tool that evaluates every aspect of your DUI case
• Professional scoring methodology that quantifies your defense strengths
• Strategic interpretation of results that identifies your best defense options
• Section-by-section analysis that reveals where to focus defense resources
• Professional techniques for presenting your analysis to your attorney
• Advanced strategies for different case strength categories

‍

Common Myths About DUI Case Assessment

‍

Most defendants operate under false assumptions that hurt their defense strategy. Understanding these misconceptions is crucial before beginning your case analysis.

‍

Myth 1: "BAC Results Are All That Matter"

Reality: Blood alcohol content is just one element of a DUI case. Cases with high BAC readings have been dismissed due to illegal stops. Improper testing procedures can invalidate results. Constitutional violations can override chemical evidence. Cases with low BAC readings can still result in convictions if other evidence is strong and procedures were followed correctly.

‍

Myth 2: "Only Attorneys Can Properly Analyze DUI Cases"

Reality: While attorneys provide essential legal expertise, systematic case analysis can be performed by anyone with the right framework. Your personal knowledge of what happened often reveals details that might not be apparent to attorneys during initial consultations. You witnessed everything firsthand.

‍

Myth 3: "All DUI Cases Are Pretty Much the Same"

Reality: DUI cases vary dramatically in strength based on specific circumstances. Some cases have multiple fatal weaknesses that make dismissal likely. Others have few challengeable elements. Understanding these differences is crucial for effective defense strategy.

‍

Myth 4: "If I Was Arrested, I Must Be Guilty"

Reality: Arrest does not equal guilt. Many DUI arrests result from procedural errors, equipment malfunctions, or constitutional violations. These can lead to case dismissal regardless of actual impairment levels.

‍

Myth 5: "Plea Bargaining Is Always the Best Option"

Reality: The best strategy depends on case strength. Strong cases may warrant aggressive defense and trial preparation. Weak cases might benefit from early negotiation. Without proper analysis, you can't make this crucial strategic decision effectively.

‍

Recognizing these myths helps you approach your case with realistic expectations and proper strategy.

‍

Why Professional Case Analysis Changes Outcomes

‍

Understanding your case strength through systematic analysis provides the foundation for all subsequent defense decisions. It dramatically improves your ability to achieve favorable outcomes.

‍

Strategic Resource Allocation

Defense resources—time, money, and attorney effort—are limited. Systematic case analysis ensures these resources focus on your strongest defense opportunities. This prevents resources from being scattered across multiple weak challenges that are unlikely to succeed.

‍

Informed Decision Making

Every DUI case involves multiple strategic decisions. Should you challenge evidence? Should you negotiate early or late? Should you accept plea offers or proceed to trial? These decisions require accurate assessment of your case's relative strengths and weaknesses.

‍

Attorney Communication Enhancement

When you understand your case through systematic analysis, you can communicate more effectively with your attorney. You can ask better questions. You can provide insights that might not be apparent during initial consultations.

‍

Realistic Expectation Setting

Proper case analysis helps establish realistic expectations about potential outcomes. This allows you to make informed decisions about accepting plea offers. You can decide whether to invest in expert witnesses. You can decide whether to proceed to trial.

‍

Professional case analysis transforms guesswork into strategic decision-making.

‍

Section 1: Traffic Stop Analysis (Questions 1-4)

‍

The legality of your initial traffic stop forms the foundation of your entire case. If the stop was improper, everything that followed may be legally inadmissible.

‍

Question 1: Why did the officer say they pulled you over?

This question evaluates the legal justification for your traffic stop. It must meet constitutional standards for reasonable suspicion.

‍

Clear traffic violation (speeding, running red light, illegal turn): 0 points

‍These violations provide clear legal justification for traffic stops. They are difficult to challenge unless the officer's observations were factually incorrect.

‍

Equipment issue (headlight out, license plate light, window tint): 1 point

‍Equipment violations can sometimes be challenged if the equipment was actually functioning properly. They can also be challenged if the violation was too minor to justify a stop.

‍

Weaving between lanes: 1 point

‍Lane violations provide legal justification. But the severity and duration of weaving can affect case strength.

‍

Weaving within lane only: 2 points

‍Many courts have held that minor weaving within a single lane doesn't justify a traffic stop. This makes it a potentially strong challenge area.

‍

Anonymous tip with no independent observations: 3 points

‍Anonymous tips alone rarely provide sufficient justification. Officers must independently observe violations after receiving the tip.

‍

No clear reason given or vague "suspicious driving": 3 points

‍Stops lacking specific facts may violate Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.

‍

Question 2: Was there video of your driving?

Video evidence can either support or contradict the officer's stated reason for the stop. This makes it crucial evidence for defense strategy.

‍

Yes, clearly shows bad driving: 0 points

‍Video evidence supporting the officer's observations makes challenging the stop difficult.

‍

Yes, shows minor issues only: 2 points

‍Video showing minor driving issues may not support the level of suspicion required for a stop.

‍

Yes, shows normal driving: 3 points

‍Video contradicting the officer's stated reason for the stop provides strong grounds for suppression motions.

‍

No video exists: 1 point

‍Absence of video means the case relies entirely on officer testimony. This can sometimes be challenged.

‍

Don't know yet: 1 point

‍Many jurisdictions have dash camera or surveillance footage that hasn't been reviewed yet.

‍

Question 3: Were you stopped at a checkpoint/roadblock?

DUI checkpoints have special constitutional requirements. If not followed, they can invalidate the stop.

‍

No, regular traffic stop: 0 points

‍Standard traffic stops are evaluated based on individual reasonable suspicion standards.

‍

Yes, at a checkpoint: 2 points

‍Checkpoints must follow strict constitutional guidelines. Violations of these procedures can result in suppression of all evidence.

‍

Question 4: How long were you detained before arrest?

Extended detention without developing probable cause may violate constitutional protections.

‍

Less than 20 minutes: 0 points

‍Brief detention for investigation is generally constitutionally permissible.

‍

20-45 minutes: 1 point

‍Extended detention may be challengeable if officers didn't develop additional evidence during this time.

‍

Over 45 minutes: 2 points

‍Prolonged detention without arrest may violate Fourth Amendment protections. This could result in evidence suppression.

‍

Traffic stops that violate constitutional requirements can invalidate your entire case.

‍

Section 2: Field Sobriety Test Evaluation (Questions 5-8)

‍

Field sobriety tests are highly challengeable because they depend on proper administration. They are affected by numerous factors unrelated to alcohol consumption.

‍

Question 5: What surface were the roadside tests conducted on?

Test surface conditions significantly affect reliability and admissibility of field sobriety test results.

‍

Flat, dry pavement: 0 points

‍Ideal testing conditions that are difficult to challenge.

‍

Slight slope or uneven surface: 2 points

‍Non-ideal conditions that can affect balance and coordination independent of alcohol consumption.

‍

Gravel, grass, or other unstable surface: 2 points

‍Unstable surfaces make it difficult for anyone to perform balance tests successfully. This is regardless of sobriety.

‍

Wet surface: 2 points

‍Wet conditions create safety hazards and affect test reliability.

‍

Significant slope: 3 points

‍Steep slopes make balance tests unreliable even for sober individuals.

‍

Question 6: What were the lighting conditions?

Proper lighting is essential for officers to accurately observe and score field sobriety tests.

‍

Daylight: 0 points

‍Optimal lighting conditions that don't affect test reliability.

‍

Well-lit area at night: 1 point

‍Adequate lighting may still be less optimal than daylight conditions.

‍

Poorly lit area/darkness: 2 points

‍Poor lighting can affect both test performance and officer observations.

‍

Bad weather affecting visibility: 2 points

‍Weather conditions that impair visibility can compromise test reliability.

‍

Question 7: Do you have any physical conditions that might affect test performance?

Medical conditions can significantly affect field sobriety test performance independent of alcohol consumption.

‍

No health issues: 0 points

‍Absence of medical conditions that could affect test performance.

‍

Minor or undocumented issues: 1 point

‍Health problems that might affect testing but lack medical documentation.

‍

Documented back/leg/knee problems: 2 points

‍Orthopedic conditions that can affect balance and coordination tests.

‍

Documented neurological issues: 2 points

‍Neurological conditions can significantly impact coordination and balance.

‍

Documented balance/inner ear problems: 3 points

‍Balance disorders make field sobriety tests unreliable indicators of impairment.

‍

Question 8: Which tests did the officer conduct?

Proper test administration is crucial for reliability and admissibility.

‍

All 3 standard tests with proper instructions: 0 points

‍Standardized Field Sobriety Tests administered correctly are difficult to challenge.

‍

Incomplete instructions given: 2 points

‍Improper instructions can invalidate test results.

‍

Non-standard tests used (alphabet, finger counting): 2 points

‍Non-standardized tests lack scientific validation and may be excluded.

‍

Tests not demonstrated by officer: 2 points

‍Failure to demonstrate tests can affect reliability and admissibility.

‍

No tests conducted: 1 point

‍Absence of field sobriety tests may indicate weak evidence of impairment.

‍

Field sobriety tests conducted under improper conditions or procedures provide strong defense opportunities.

‍

Section 3: Chemical Testing Assessment (Questions 9-12)

‍

Chemical test results are often viewed as the strongest evidence in DUI cases. However, they have numerous potential vulnerabilities.

‍

Question 9: Did you take a breath, blood, or urine test?

The type of test affects both the strength of evidence and available challenges.

‍

Refused all testing: 1 point

‍Test refusal eliminates chemical evidence but may be used to infer consciousness of guilt.

‍

Breath test: Continue to question 10

‍Breath tests have specific vulnerability areas related to administration and accuracy.

‍

Blood test: Continue to question 11

‍Blood tests have different vulnerability areas related to collection and chain of custody.

‍

Urine test: 2 points

‍Urine tests are less reliable and may be more easily challenged.

‍

Question 10: For Breath Test Analysis

‍

Test showed 0.15 or higher: 0 points

‍High BAC results are more difficult to challenge. But they're not impossible if procedural errors occurred.

‍

Test showed 0.08-0.14: 1 point

‍Moderate BAC results may be more susceptible to challenge based on testing procedures.

‍

Test showed 0.05-0.079: 3 points

‍Results below the legal limit may indicate testing errors or provide strong defense evidence.

‍

Officer didn't observe you for 15+ minutes before test: 3 points

‍Failure to follow required observation period can invalidate breath test results.

‍

Test device calibration records not yet reviewed: 1 point

‍Calibration problems can undermine test reliability and provide grounds for exclusion.

‍

Question 11: For Blood Test Analysis

‍

Test showed 0.15 or higher: 0 points

‍High blood alcohol results are strong evidence. But they may still be challengeable on procedural grounds.

‍

Test showed 0.08-0.14: 1 point

‍Moderate results may be more vulnerable to procedural challenges.

‍

Test showed 0.05-0.079: 3 points

‍Below-limit results may indicate testing errors or provide strong defense evidence.

‍

Blood drawn more than 2 hours after driving: 2 points

‍Delayed blood draws require extrapolation calculations that can be challenged.

‍

Non-medical personnel drew blood: 3 points

‍Improper blood collection can result in test exclusion.

‍

Chain of custody documentation incomplete: 3 points

‍Gaps in evidence handling can undermine test reliability.

‍

Question 12: Do you have medical conditions that could affect testing?

Certain medical conditions can cause false positive results or affect test accuracy.

‍

No relevant conditions: 0 points

‍Absence of conditions that could affect testing accuracy.

‍

GERD/Acid reflux/Heartburn: 2 points (for breath test)

‍These conditions can cause falsely elevated breath test readings.

‍

Diabetes: 2 points

‍Diabetes can produce acetone that breath machines may register as alcohol.

‍

On low-carb/keto diet: 2 points (for breath test)

‍These diets can produce compounds that interfere with breath testing.

‍

Taking medications that could affect results: 2 points

‍Certain medications can interfere with testing accuracy.

‍

Chemical testing vulnerabilities often provide the strongest technical defense opportunities.

‍

Section 4: Officer Procedure Review (Questions 13-16)

‍

Procedural violations can provide grounds for evidence suppression regardless of other case factors. Police must follow constitutional requirements throughout your arrest.

‍

Question 13: Was your Miranda warning given at the right time?

Improper Miranda warnings can result in suppression of incriminating statements.

‍

Yes, before questioning after arrest: 0 points

‍Proper Miranda procedures followed correctly.

‍

No warning given but questions asked after arrest: 3 points

‍Miranda violations can result in suppression of statements and derived evidence.

‍

Don't remember: 1 point

‍Unclear Miranda procedures may provide grounds for investigation and potential challenges.

‍

Question 14: Did you ask to speak with an attorney?

Denial of counsel rights can provide grounds for evidence suppression.

‍

No: 0 points

‍No counsel request made.

‍

Yes, and was allowed to: 0 points

‍Counsel rights properly respected.

‍

Yes, but was denied or delayed: 3 points

‍Denial of counsel rights may violate constitutional protections.

‍

Question 15: How well was your arrest documented?

Documentation quality affects the prosecution's ability to prove their case. It affects your ability to challenge evidence.

‍

Thorough documentation and video: 0 points

‍Complete documentation supports prosecution case.

‍

Complete paperwork but no video: 1 point

‍Absence of video means reliance on officer testimony alone.

‍

Video contradicts written report: 3 points

‍Inconsistencies between documentation and video can undermine officer credibility.

‍

Incomplete or missing documents: 3 points

‍Documentation gaps can weaken prosecution case and provide defense opportunities.

‍

Question 16: How would you describe the officer's conduct?

Officer conduct affects credibility and may provide grounds for challenging evidence.

‍

Professional and by-the-book: 0 points

‍Professional conduct supports officer credibility.

‍

Minor procedural errors: 1 point

‍Small mistakes may not significantly impact case but could provide minor advantages.

‍

Significant procedural errors: 2 points

‍Major procedural violations can provide grounds for evidence challenges.

‍

Rude, aggressive, or unprofessional: 1 point

‍Unprofessional conduct may affect officer credibility but doesn't necessarily invalidate evidence.

‍

Constitutional violations during arrest procedures can override even strong prosecution evidence.

‍

Section 5: Personal Conduct Evaluation (Questions 17-20)

‍

Your behavior and appearance during the arrest can significantly impact how evidence is perceived. These factors influence case outcomes substantially.

‍

Question 17: Did you make statements about drinking?

Your statements about alcohol consumption become evidence that can be used for or against you.

‍

Admitted specific number/details of drinks: 0 points

‍Specific admissions provide strong evidence for prosecution.

‍

Made vague admission of drinking: 1 point

‍General admissions are less specific but still provide some evidence of consumption.

‍

Denied drinking despite evidence: 0 points

‍Denials contradicted by evidence can hurt credibility.

‍

Refused to answer questions about drinking: 2 points

‍Exercising your right to remain silent cannot be used against you and may be strategic.

‍

Question 18: How would you describe your behavior during arrest?

Your demeanor and cooperation level can influence how judges and juries perceive your case.

‍

Cooperative and polite: 2 points

‍Cooperative behavior demonstrates respect for law enforcement and the legal process.

‍

Quiet but compliant: 1 point

‍Non-disruptive behavior is generally viewed favorably.

‍

Argumentative: 0 points

‍Argumentative behavior may suggest consciousness of guilt or poor judgment.

‍

Combative or insulting: -1 point

‍Hostile behavior can harm your case by suggesting poor character or judgment.

‍

Question 19: How would you describe your speech in the video?

Speech patterns are often used as evidence of impairment. They can significantly impact case perception.

‍

Clear and normal: 3 points

‍Normal speech patterns contradict impairment allegations.

‍

Slightly slurred: 1 point

‍Minor speech issues may be explained by factors other than alcohol.

‍

Notably slurred: 0 points

‍Significantly slurred speech supports impairment allegations.

‍

No video to confirm: 1 point

‍Absence of video means reliance on officer observations alone.

‍

Question 20: How would you describe your physical appearance?

Physical signs of impairment are commonly cited as evidence in DUI cases.

‍

Normal appearance: 3 points

‍Normal appearance contradicts impairment allegations.

‍

Bloodshot eyes but otherwise normal: 1 point

‍Limited physical signs may be explained by factors other than alcohol.

‍

Multiple signs (red eyes, unsteady, disheveled): 0 points

‍Multiple physical indicators support impairment allegations.

‍

No video to confirm: 1 point

‍Absence of video evidence means reliance on officer observations.

‍

Your conduct and appearance during arrest can either support or undermine the prosecution's impairment theory.

‍

Score Interpretation and Defense Strategy

‍

Your total score provides valuable insight into your case strength and optimal defense strategy. Different score ranges require different approaches.

‍

Score Categories and Strategic Implications

‍

0-9 Points: Challenging Case

‍Your case has few obvious weaknesses that can be exploited through standard defense challenges. This doesn't mean your case is hopeless. But it will require creative legal strategies and detailed investigation to identify less obvious issues.

‍

Strategic Approach:

• Focus on meticulous review of all procedures and documentation
• Consider expert witnesses to challenge technical evidence
• Emphasize mitigation and rehabilitation in plea negotiations
• Investigate officer training and certification issues
• Challenge evidence on technical scientific grounds

‍

10-19 Points: Moderate Defense Potential

‍Your case has several potential weaknesses that may be used to negotiate better terms or challenge specific evidence. A balanced approach combining selective challenges with strategic negotiation typically works best.

‍

Strategic Approach:

• Identify and challenge your strongest areas while negotiating on weaker points
• Use evidence challenges as leverage in plea negotiations
• Consider diversion programs or alternative sentencing
• Focus resources on your highest-scoring sections
• Prepare for trial while maintaining negotiation options

‍

20-29 Points: Strong Defense Potential

‍Your case has significant weaknesses that could substantially reduce charges or result in favorable trial outcomes. An aggressive defense strategy focusing on key identified weaknesses is typically recommended.

‍

Strategic Approach:

• Pursue aggressive motion practice to suppress evidence
• Challenge multiple aspects of the prosecution's case
• Consider trial as a viable option
• Use case strengths to negotiate from position of power
• Focus on constitutional and procedural violations

‍

30+ Points: Very Strong Defense CaseYour case has multiple major weaknesses that could lead to evidence suppression or case dismissal. Cases in this category often result in very favorable outcomes when properly defended.

‍

Strategic Approach:

• File comprehensive suppression motions
• Challenge the fundamental legality of the stop and arrest
• Consider dismissal as a realistic outcome
• Use overwhelming defense strength to negotiate exceptional plea terms
• Prepare aggressively for trial with confidence

‍

Your score determines whether you should fight aggressively or negotiate strategically.

‍

Strategic Defense Focus Based on Your Results

‍

Your section scores reveal where to concentrate defense resources for maximum impact. Different sections require different types of challenges.

‍

Highest Points in Section 1 (Traffic Stop): Constitutional Challenge Strategy

‍

Primary Focus Areas:

• File motions to suppress all evidence based on illegal stop
• Challenge reasonable suspicion for initial detention
• Investigate checkpoint procedures and constitutional compliance
• Challenge extended detention without probable cause

‍

Supporting Strategies:

• Obtain all video evidence of driving and stop
• Research officer training on traffic stop procedures
• Investigate similar stops by the same officer
• Challenge officer observations and credibility

‍

Highest Points in Section 2 (Field Sobriety Tests): Test Reliability Challenge

‍

Primary Focus Areas:

• Challenge test conditions and environmental factors
• Use medical evidence to explain poor test performance
• Challenge officer training and test administration
• Attack the scientific reliability of test results

‍

Supporting Strategies:

• Obtain medical records documenting relevant conditions
• Research officer certification and training records
• Photograph test location to document conditions
• Consider expert witnesses on field sobriety test limitations

‍

Highest Points in Section 3 (Chemical Testing): Scientific Challenge Strategy

‍

Primary Focus Areas:

• Challenge testing procedures and protocols
• Investigate equipment maintenance and calibration
• Use medical conditions to explain false results
• Challenge chain of custody and sample integrity

‍

Supporting Strategies:

• Subpoena all maintenance and calibration records
• Investigate operator training and certification
• Consider expert witnesses on testing limitations
• Challenge laboratory procedures and accreditation

‍

Highest Points in Section 4 (Officer Procedures): Rights Violation Strategy

‍

Primary Focus Areas:

• Challenge Miranda violations and statement admissibility
• Investigate denial of counsel rights
• Challenge incomplete or inconsistent documentation
• Use officer misconduct to undermine credibility

‍

Supporting Strategies:

• Obtain all audio and video recordings
• Research officer disciplinary history
• Challenge officer training and certification
• Investigate similar cases handled by same officer

‍

Highest Points in Section 5 (Personal Conduct): Character Defense Strategy

‍

Primary Focus Areas:

• Emphasize lack of impairment indicators
• Use cooperative behavior to demonstrate character
• Challenge officer observations with video evidence
• Present alternative explanations for any negative indicators

‍

Supporting Strategies:

• Obtain all video evidence of arrest and booking
• Gather character witnesses and references
• Document any medical conditions affecting appearance
• Present evidence of responsible behavior and good character

‍

Focus your defense resources on your highest-scoring section for maximum impact.

‍

How to Use Your Analysis with Your Attorney

‍

Your completed case analysis provides a valuable foundation for productive attorney consultations and strategic planning. It helps you participate more effectively in your defense.

‍

Preparation for Attorney Consultation

‍

Organize Your Results:

• Complete the assessment honestly and objectively
• Calculate your total score and section breakdowns
• Identify your highest-scoring sections for strategic focus
• Prepare questions about specific issues you've identified

‍

Document Supporting Evidence:

• Gather any evidence that supports your high-scoring areas
• Collect medical records if relevant to your case
• Organize any photos, videos, or documents related to your arrest
• Prepare a timeline of events from your perspective

‍

Presenting Your Analysis to Your Attorney

‍

Strategic Discussion Points:

• Share your total score and ask for attorney's assessment
• Discuss which sections scored highest and why
• Ask about specific defense strategies for your strongest areas
• Inquire about additional investigation needed in high-scoring sections

‍

Collaborative Strategy Development:

• Use your analysis to guide investigation priorities
• Discuss how your results affect plea negotiation strategy
• Consider whether your score supports trial preparation
• Plan resource allocation based on your strongest defense areas

‍

Questions to Ask Based on Your Results

‍

For High-Scoring Cases (20+ points):

• "Given my score, should we pursue aggressive motion practice?"
• "Do you think we should prepare for trial rather than negotiate early?"
• "What additional investigation would strengthen our position?"
• "How do you assess our chances of getting evidence suppressed?"

‍

For Moderate-Scoring Cases (10-19 points):

• "Which of my scoring areas provide the best negotiation leverage?"
• "Should we challenge evidence selectively or focus on negotiation?"
• "What plea outcomes might be realistic given my case strengths?"
• "How can we use identified weaknesses to improve offers?"

‍

For Lower-Scoring Cases (0-9 points):

• "Are there less obvious issues we should investigate further?"
• "What mitigation strategies would be most effective?"
• "Should we focus primarily on negotiation rather than challenges?"
• "What alternative sentencing options might be available?"

‍

Your case analysis enables more productive attorney consultations and better strategic decisions.

‍

Turn Your Case Analysis Into Winning Strategy

‍

Understanding your case strength through systematic analysis is only the first step toward achieving the best possible outcome. The key is translating this knowledge into effective legal strategy. You need to maximize your defense potential while avoiding costly mistakes.

‍

Your completed case analysis provides a roadmap for defense strategy. But implementing that strategy requires experienced legal guidance. The difference between knowing your case strengths and effectively leveraging them in court can be crucial. It can mean the difference between conviction and case dismissal. It can mean the difference between maximum penalties and favorable plea terms.

‍

Don't let strong defense opportunities go unused due to inexperienced representation or inadequate strategic planning. Cases with significant defense potential require attorneys who understand how to translate case analysis into effective courtroom advocacy and negotiation strategy.

‍

Your case analysis reveals opportunities that require expert legal strategy to achieve maximum benefit.

‍

At McMahon Law Offices, we use this same systematic case analysis approach with every client. But we take it further. Our experience allows us to identify additional defense opportunities that aren't apparent through general analysis. We investigate technical issues that require specialized knowledge. We implement sophisticated defense strategies that maximize your case's potential.

‍

We understand that every point on your case analysis represents a potential defense opportunity. But we also know how to evaluate which opportunities are most likely to succeed. We know how to present them most effectively to prosecutors and judges.

‍

Call us at 630-953-4400 for your free consultation and professional case analysis.

‍

During your consultation, we'll review your completed analysis. We'll identify additional defense opportunities you may have missed. We'll develop a comprehensive strategy that leverages your case's strongest points while addressing its potential weaknesses.

‍

Contact McMahon Law Offices today:

• Phone: 630-953-4400 (Available 24/7)
• Email: info@mcmahonlegal.net
• Address: 2150 McDonald Drive, Oak Brook, Illinois 60523

‍

Don't let defense opportunities revealed by your case analysis go unused. With proper legal strategy based on systematic case evaluation, you may achieve a much better outcome than you thought possible.

‍

Professional case analysis combined with experienced legal representation creates the strongest possible defense strategy.

‍