False Imprisonment Defense Lawyer in Wisconsin

Charged with False Imprisonment under Wis. Stat. § 940.30? This felony offense is frequently charged in domestic or interpersonal disputes and can carry serious criminal and collateral consequences. Early legal representation is critical to protecting your rights and your future.

What the Law Says About False Imprisonment

Under Wis. Stat. § 940.30, a person commits False Imprisonment when they intentionally confine or restrain another person without that person’s consent and while knowing they have no lawful authority to do so.

Unlike Kidnapping under Wis. Stat. § 940.31, False Imprisonment does not require movement of the alleged victim. The offense may be based solely on unlawful restraint or confinement, even for a brief period of time.

What the State Must Prove to Convict on False Imprisonment

To convict a defendant of False Imprisonment under Wis. Stat. § 940.30, the State must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

  1. The defendant confined or restrained another person.
    • “Confine or restrain” means restricting a person’s freedom of movement or liberty without justification.
  2. The defendant acted intentionally.
    • The act was purposeful, not accidental or negligent.
  3. The person did not consent to the confinement or restraint.
  4. The defendant knew they had no lawful authority to confine or restrain the person.

These elements are detailed in Wisconsin Jury Instruction – Criminal 1275 False Imprisonment.

Penalties and Sentencing on False Imprisonment in Wisconsin

False Imprisonment is classified as a Class H felony under Wisconsin law and carries significant criminal and collateral consequences.

  • Up to 6 years imprisonment
  • Up to $10,000 in fines
  • If the alleged victim is a minor and the defendant is not the child’s parent, a conviction may result in sex-offender registration under Wis. Stat. § 301.45
  • Possible no-contact orders and restrictions on housing or employment

Sentencing decisions are influenced by the circumstances of the confinement, the duration of the restraint, whether force or threats were used, and the defendant’s prior criminal history.

False Imprisonment Attorney in Wisconsin Free Consultations
REQUEST A FREE AND CONFIDENTIAL CONSULTATION
New Website Intake

Common False Imprisonment Scenarios in Wisconsin

False Imprisonment charges often arise from fast-moving, emotionally charged situations where the alleged restraint is brief or disputed. Common scenarios include:

  • Domestic or dating-partner disputes where one person blocks a doorway or holds another’s phone
  • Physical restraint in vehicles or homes during arguments
  • Situations involving threats preventing someone from leaving
  • Situations where attempts to calm, protect, or de-escalate are later characterized as unlawful restraint
  • Cases charged alongside related offenses such as Battery, Disorderly Conduct, or Kidnapping

Defenses and Legal Strategies for False Imprisonment Charges

False Imprisonment cases frequently turn on whether the alleged conduct actually amounted to unlawful restraint and whether the defendant acted intentionally and without lawful authority. Effective defense strategies often include:

  • Lack of Intent – The act was impulsive or misunderstood, not an intentional restraint.
  • Consent – The alleged victim voluntarily stayed or had freedom to leave.
  • Lawful Authority – Certain caretakers, parents, or security personnel may have legal justification.
  • Credibility Issues – Contradictions in statements, timelines, or physical evidence can create reasonable doubt.
  • Overcharging – The facts may only support lesser conduct such as disorderly conduct or civil interference.

Why Hiring a False Imprisonment Lawyer Matters

False Imprisonment charges often arise from emotionally charged situations and are frequently based on subjective interpretations of brief or disputed conduct. These cases can escalate quickly, particularly when tied to domestic allegations or overlapping violent-crime charges. Early involvement by experienced defense counsel is critical to challenging the State’s narrative and preventing unnecessary felony exposure.

Local Experience matters. The attorneys at Chirafisi Anderson, S.C. regularly defend False Imprisonment and related violent-crime charges throughout Southern and Central Wisconsin, including Dane, Rock, Iowa, Green, Columbia, Dodge, Jefferson, and Sauk Counties. We understand how local prosecutors evaluate restraint allegations and how courts apply the statute in real-world scenarios.

Proven track record of results. Our firm has obtained dismissals, charge reductions, and deferred resolutions in confinement-based and domestic-related cases by exposing factual inconsistencies, challenging intent, and presenting early mitigation.

Recognized legal excellence. Attorneys at Chirafisi Anderson, S.C. are recognized by Super Lawyers® and are active members of the Wisconsin Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, reflecting a commitment to high-level advocacy in serious felony cases.

View some of the criminal case results from Chirafisi Anderson, S.C.


Contact Chirafisi Anderson, S.C.

A False Imprisonment charge can place your freedom, reputation, and future at risk. These cases require careful analysis of intent, consent, and the surrounding circumstances to prevent overcharging and unnecessary felony consequences. An experienced defense attorney can intervene early to protect your rights and pursue the strongest possible defense.

Chirafisi Anderson, S.C. represents individuals charged with False Imprisonment and related violent offenses throughout Southern and Central Wisconsin, including Dane, Rock, Iowa, Green, Columbia, Dodge, Jefferson, and Sauk Counties.

Frequently asked questions – False Imprisonment in Wisconsin

No. Kidnapping requires movement of the victim; False Imprisonment only requires unlawful restraint.

Yes, if threats or intimidation effectively prevent someone from leaving.

Yes. It’s frequently charged when one person blocks exits or restricts another’s freedom.

The State must prove actual restraint—mere presence is not enough.

Only when the victim is a minor and the defendant is not the child’s parent.