DUI Wins

Dec 11, 2020	Case: 20-CT-036615	Judge Peacock
Facts:	The defendant was stopped after he drove in between various barricades on a road that was being built. His car eventually got stuck in the sand at the dead end of the road. The officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he also staggered. He also had glassy eyes and swayed while he stood. He refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI.
Defense:	The firm called into question the lawfulness of the detention by the officer. There was no probable cause to order him out of the car.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Dec 11, 2020	Case: 20-CT-037546	Judge Peacock
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving on the solid yellow line dividing the north and south bound lanes. The defendant had an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and a flushed/red face. He appeared unsteady and swayed. He refused to perform field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The lawfulness of the traffic stop was called into question. There was no traffic affected by the defendant's driving, it was unknown how long he drove on the line, and the distance was unknown.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Dec 10, 2020	Case: AD0B1JE	Judge Hessinger
Facts:	The defendant was found by police sitting in her car. They had responded to call about a female being passed out. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy/watery eyes, and slurred speech. She also stumbled on her words. She fell while getting out of her car and leaned on the vehicle. She only performed the HGN (eye test) and then refused further roadside tests. She was arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
Defense:	Under Florida law, an officer must advise a defendant of adverse consequences if they refuse roadsides tests. Here, the officer did not advise the defendant of any consequences so the refusal to perform field sobriety tests would have been excluded from evidence. Also, many of the observations the officer wrote in his reports were contradicted by he video tape.
Result:	The State Dropped the Defendant's Second DUI.

Dec 10, 2020	Case: 20-CT-010598	Judge Castor
Facts:	The defendant was pulled over for driving all over the road. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol and bloodshot eyes. He was unable to divide his attention and could not focus on the officer’s questions. He performed very poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later agreed to a blood draw due to having being taken the hospital. The blood was a .178 after being tested.
Defense:	The firm brought to the State's attention numerous issues as to whether the blood draw was unlawful.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Dec 8, 2020	Case: 20-CT-006676	Judge Damico
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for failing to maintain a single lane. In addition, a civilian previously called 911 stating the defendant appeared to be a drunk driver and was driving on the wrong side of the road. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, red eyes, and he admitted to having drank 3 or 4 glasses of wine. After performing poorly on roadside test, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The defendant is diabetic and many of his medical symptoms that he exhibited were consistent with alcohol impairment. Thus, there was reasonable doubt as to whether he was impaired from his medical condition versus alcohol.
Result:	The State Dropped the DUI.

Dec 8, 2020	Case: 20-CT-009168	Judge Damico
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for making a wide turn and failing to maintain a single lane. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, and she admitted to having drank wine. She performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The officer reports contradicted the video tape.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Dec 3, 2020	Case: 20-CT-008371	Judge Gutman
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving the wrong way down a one way street. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, a blank/dazed look, and watery eyes. He had an open beer on the car and moved very slow and deliberate. The defendant refused to perform any field sobriety tests other than HGN (eye test). He was arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State that based on the video and police reports, there was a lack of probable cause to arrest the defendant.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Dec 3, 2020	Case: 19-CT-002608	Judge Inman
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving with no headlights and flat tires. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he also staggered. After performing various field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The video of the defendant's roadsides contradicted the officer reports as to the level of alleged impairment. Due to the conflicts, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Nov 25, 2020	Case: ADB9LKE	Judge Szematowicz
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, a flushed face, and bloodshot/watery eyes. The defendant also had slurred speech and denied drinking. He then performed various field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .132 and a .129 in the breath machine.
Defense:	On video, the defendant's speech was not slurred which contradicted the reports. Also, he performed much better on the roadsides on tape than as written. Finally, the firm was able to show the State that the defendant was under the legal limit at the time of driving by extrapolating back the defendant's breath alcohol level to the the time of driving.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Nov 25, 2020	Case: AD0AW0E	Judge Szematowicz
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol. slow/slurred speech, and watery eyes. According to the officer, he failed the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .098 and a .094 in the breath machine.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton was able to show the State that the defendant was under the legal limit due to the .02 margin of error in the breath machine. Also, we pointed out to the State that based on the video there was no probable cause to arrest the Defendant for DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Nov 20, 2020	Case: 20-CT-000289	Judge Conrad
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slow/stammered speech. The defendant stated he had drank a beer and Jack Daniels with water. He then performed various field sobriety tests such as the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand. He was subsequently arrested for DUI and later blew a .126 and a .121 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The firm pointed out that the defendant's performance on the field sobriety tests on the tape clearly showed he was lower than .08. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Nov 20, 2020	Case: 19-CT-020521	Judge Conrad
Facts:	The officer stopped the defendant to conduct a welfare check as he was failing to maintain a single lane. The defendant had an odor of alcohol, glassy watery eyes, and slurred speech. He also had fumbling fingers, difficulty opening the car door, vomit on his shirt, and he continuously spit during the investigation. The defendant stated he had drank 3-4 beers along with 2-3 shots of alcohol. He performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .189 and a .186 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The lawfulness of the traffic stop was called into question. The reports were vague as to the length of the driving pattern, distance, and time frame. It was also unclear if any traffic had been affected. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Nov 13, 2020	Case: 19-014349MU10A	Judge Solomon
Facts:	The defendant was stopped after the officer observed him cross the yellow lane marker a full tire width, nearly strike the center median, and then drifting all over. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, a flushed face, bloodshot eyes, and he stated he had consumed 4 vodka drinks. He performed poorly on roadside tests. For example, on the walk and turn, he stepped off the line, used his arms for balance, and had to stop to steady himself. On the one leg stand, he put his foot down and raised his arms for balance. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton filed a motion to suppress the lawfulness of the traffic stop. At the motion hearing, the prosecutor played the video of the incident and put on testimony of the DUI task force officer. The officer testified that the video was not a complete story of the driving pattern. Specifically, the driving pattern prior to the video was more erratic than what the video revealed. The Court agreed with Parks and Braxton in that the video was the best evidence and concluded that while the video did show a vehicle weaving within the lane, the severity did not rise to the level of "significant and continuous" required by case law. The Court granted the motion and excluded all of the evidence. The DUI was Dismissed.
Result:	The DUI was dismissed.

Nov 5, 2020	Case: 20-CT-006872	Judge Booras
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glassy eyes. His movements were slow and deliberate, he appeared unsteady, and he stated had consumed a few drinks. After performing various field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He then blew a .080 and a .081 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The firm pointed out there is a built in .005 and .02 margins of error with breath readings. We were able to then bring the defendant's results under the legal limit. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Nov 4, 2020	Case: 20-CT-002010	Judge Farr
Facts:	A civilian called police after seeing the defendant swerving and hitting a wall on the bridge. Officers found the defendant asleep in a parking lot with the right front tire shredded. They observed him to have an odor of alcohol, glassy/bloodshot eyes, and he stated that he had drank whiskey. He then performed the walk and turn, one leg stand and HGN (eye test) exercises. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	When officers found the defendant, he was sleeping in a reclined drivers seat. Since no officer actually saw him driving, he wasn't in actual physical control because he had no capability of operating the car while sleeping. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Nov 4, 2020	Case: 19-CT-016625	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, glass/watery eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant then performed various field sobriety tests including the finger to nose, walk and turn, and one leg stand. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	Based on the contradictions in all the evidence, the firm was able to show the State that there was a lack of probable cause to make the arrest. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 28, 2020	Case: 20-CT-000597	Judge Nicola
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving with his high beams on. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and a flushed face. He also admitted to having drank 3 beers. He then performed various field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
Defense:	The officer's reports exaggerated all the alleged indicators of impairment prior to and during the roadside tests. This was brought to the State's attention by the firm and they Dropped the Defendant's Second DUI and he received no criminal conviction on his record.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 28, 2020	Case: 19-CT-012953	Judge Myers
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for failing to maintain a single lane. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, fumbling fingers, and slurred speech. She had difficulty following instructions and leaned on the car for balance. Roadside tests were stopped for safety concerns, due to her level of intoxication. She was arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The firm was able to show that the defendant never actually refused to give a breath test and it was due to the machine. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 28, 2020	Case: 19-CT-013373	Judge Myers
Facts:	The defendant ran a red light and ended up in an embankment. When officers and fire rescue arrived, they noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, thick tongued speech, and a sway while he stood. He was asked to perform roadside tests but he refused. He was then arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
Defense:	When a defendant refuses to perform roadside tests, the officer must advise of the adverse consequences for refusing. or the refusal is excluded from evidence. Here, the officer did not give any adverse consequences and immediately arrested the Defendant. The State Dropped the Defendant's Second DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 27, 2020	Case: 20-CT-020145	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was stopped after a manager at a bar called police saying that the defendant was intoxicated and refused an Uber ride. Once stopped, the officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He also swayed while he stood and admitted to drinking. He was arrested for DUI after performing roadside tests. He later blew. a .129 and a .126 in the breath machine.
Defense:	There was no corroboration by the officer of any erratic driving pattern or intoxication based on the call. Thus, the lawfulness of the traffic stop was called into question. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.