DUI Wins

Nov 27, 2012	Case: CT-008247-XFA	Judge Jeske
Facts:	The defendant was involved in a single car crash whereby he drove off the road and hit a light pole. The officer who arrived on scene observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he also was swaying as he stood. According to the officer, he failed the video taped roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After is arrest, he blew a .099 and .094 in the breath machine.
Result:	The State Dropped the DUI.

Nov 27, 2012	Case: CT-008247-XFA	Judge Jeske
Facts:	The defendant was involved in a single car crash whereby he drove off the road and hit a light pole. The officer who arrived on scene observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he also was swaying as he stood. According to the officer, he failed the video taped roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After is arrest, he blew a .099 and .094 in the breath machine.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton were ready for trial.
Result:	The State Dropped the DUI.

Nov 27, 2012	Case: CT-008247-XFA	Judge Jeske
Facts:	The defendant was involved in a single car crash whereby he drove off the road and hit a light pole. The officer who arrived on scene observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he also was swaying as he stood. According to the officer, he failed the video taped roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After is arrest, he blew a .099 and .094 in the breath machine.
Result:	The State Dropped the DUI.

Nov 27, 2012	Case: CT-008247-XFA	Judge Jeske
Facts:	The defendant was involved in a single car crash whereby he drove off the road and hit a light pole. The officer who arrived on scene observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he also was swaying as he stood. According to the officer, he failed the video taped roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After is arrest, he blew a .099 and .094 in the breath machine.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton were ready for trial.
Result:	The State Dropped the DUI.

Nov 21, 2012	Case: 11-021253MM10A	Judge Gottlieb
Facts:	The defendant was seen by a civilian witness running several red lights. The civilian then observed the defendant weaving all over the road. The civilian witness called 911 and continued to follow the defendant. At one point the defendant exited her car and vomited on the side of the road before continuing on. Eventually, the defendant stopped and proceeded to throw up again. Eventually, the civilian was able to take the keys out of the car and prevent the defendant from driving. The first officer on scene observed a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, slurred speech and a flushed face. He also observed vomit and dirt all over her clothing. The officer then collected a sworn taped statement from the civilian witness. The defendant attempted but was unable to perform any of the field sobriety exercises. She was arrested and charged with DUI and DUI Enhanced. She subsequently blew a .202 in the intoxilyzer.
Result:	The motion was Granted and both DUI charges were Dismissed.

Nov 21, 2012	Case: 11-021253MM10A	Judge Gottlieb
Facts:	The defendant was seen by a civilian witness running several red lights. The civilian then observed the defendant weaving all over the road. The civilian witness called 911 and continued to follow the defendant. At one point the defendant exited her car and vomited on the side of the road before continuing on. Eventually, the defendant stopped and proceeded to throw up again. Eventually, the civilian was able to take the keys out of the car and prevent the defendant from driving. The first officer on scene observed a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, slurred speech and a flushed face. He also observed vomit and dirt all over her clothing. The officer then collected a sworn taped statement from the civilian witness. The defendant attempted but was unable to perform any of the field sobriety exercises. She was arrested and charged with DUI and DUI Enhanced. She subsequently blew a .202 in the intoxilyzer.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton filed a motion to suppress based on an unlawful detention. At the motion, the civilian witness testified about the observations concerning the driving pattern. He also stated that he was a bartender and was capable of identifying individuals who were impaired. Nonetheless, on cross examination, the witness failed to testify about any specific observations that might be consistent with impairment other than the driving pattern. The firm argued that similar to an officer, a civilian cannot detain a person if there is no reasonable suspicion to believe the defendant is impaired.
Result:	The motion was Granted and both DUI charges were Dismissed.

Nov 21, 2012	Case: 11-021253MM10A	Judge Gottlieb
Facts:	The defendant was seen by a civilian witness running several red lights. The civilian then observed the defendant weaving all over the road. The civilian witness called 911 and continued to follow the defendant. At one point the defendant exited her car and vomited on the side of the road before continuing on. Eventually, the defendant stopped and proceeded to throw up again. Eventually, the civilian was able to take the keys out of the car and prevent the defendant from driving. The first officer on scene observed a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, slurred speech and a flushed face. He also observed vomit and dirt all over her clothing. The officer then collected a sworn taped statement from the civilian witness. The defendant attempted but was unable to perform any of the field sobriety exercises. She was arrested and charged with DUI and DUI Enhanced. She subsequently blew a .202 in the intoxilyzer.
Result:	The motion was Granted and both DUI charges were Dismissed.

Nov 21, 2012	Case: 11-021253MM10A	Judge Gottlieb
Facts:	The defendant was seen by a civilian witness running several red lights. The civilian then observed the defendant weaving all over the road. The civilian witness called 911 and continued to follow the defendant. At one point the defendant exited her car and vomited on the side of the road before continuing on. Eventually, the defendant stopped and proceeded to throw up again. Eventually, the civilian was able to take the keys out of the car and prevent the defendant from driving. The first officer on scene observed a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, slurred speech and a flushed face. He also observed vomit and dirt all over her clothing. The officer then collected a sworn taped statement from the civilian witness. The defendant attempted but was unable to perform any of the field sobriety exercises. She was arrested and charged with DUI and DUI Enhanced. She subsequently blew a .202 in the intoxilyzer.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton filed a motion to suppress based on an unlawful detention. At the motion, the civilian witness testified about the observations concerning the driving pattern. He also stated that he was a bartender and was capable of identifying individuals who were impaired. Nonetheless, on cross examination, the witness failed to testify about any specific observations that might be consistent with impairment other than the driving pattern. The firm argued that similar to an officer, a civilian cannot detain a person if there is no reasonable suspicion to believe the defendant is impaired.
Result:	The motion was Granted and both DUI charges were Dismissed.

Nov 16, 2012	Case: 2012-CT-010637AXXX	Judge Mitchell
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and he had mumbled speech. The defendant was wobbly and unsteady upon exiting the car. The defendant refused the roadside tests and after his arrest for DUI he refused the breath test.
Result:	The State Dropped the DUI.

Nov 16, 2012	Case: 2012-CT-011396AXXX	Judge Evans
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving and almost striking a median. The officer observed slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and the defendant was stumbling. The officer believed that he was impaired by a chemical and/or controlled substance. He then performed the roadside tasks on video. He performed very poorly. For example, on the walk and turn test, he used his arms for balance and fell off the line. On the one leg stand, he kept dropping his foot and the test was terminated. On the alphabet test, he stated the letters out of sequence. He was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he was requested to give a urine sample. That sample revealed numerous controlled substances in the defendant's system based on the lab results.
Result:	The State Dropped the DUI.

Nov 16, 2012	Case: 2012-CT-010637AXXX	Judge Mitchell
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and he had mumbled speech. The defendant was wobbly and unsteady upon exiting the car. The defendant refused the roadside tests and after his arrest for DUI he refused the breath test.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton were ready for trial.
Result:	The State Dropped the DUI.

Nov 16, 2012	Case: 2012-CT-011396AXXX	Judge Evans
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving and almost striking a median. The officer observed slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and the defendant was stumbling. The officer believed that he was impaired by a chemical and/or controlled substance. He then performed the roadside tasks on video. He performed very poorly. For example, on the walk and turn test, he used his arms for balance and fell off the line. On the one leg stand, he kept dropping his foot and the test was terminated. On the alphabet test, he stated the letters out of sequence. He was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he was requested to give a urine sample. That sample revealed numerous controlled substances in the defendant's system based on the lab results.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton took the pre-trial deposition of the toxicologist who analyzed the urine sample. In deposition, the toxicologist could not state with certainty that the defendant was under the influence of those particular controlled substances at the time of driving as they could have been in his system for a lengthy amount of time.
Result:	The State Dropped the DUI.

Nov 16, 2012	Case: 2012-CT-010637AXXX	Judge Mitchell
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and he had mumbled speech. The defendant was wobbly and unsteady upon exiting the car. The defendant refused the roadside tests and after his arrest for DUI he refused the breath test.
Result:	The State Dropped the DUI.

Nov 16, 2012	Case: 2012-CT-011396AXXX	Judge Evans
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving and almost striking a median. The officer observed slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and the defendant was stumbling. The officer believed that he was impaired by a chemical and/or controlled substance. He then performed the roadside tasks on video. He performed very poorly. For example, on the walk and turn test, he used his arms for balance and fell off the line. On the one leg stand, he kept dropping his foot and the test was terminated. On the alphabet test, he stated the letters out of sequence. He was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he was requested to give a urine sample. That sample revealed numerous controlled substances in the defendant's system based on the lab results.
Result:	The State Dropped the DUI.

Nov 16, 2012	Case: 2012-CT-010637AXXX	Judge Mitchell
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and he had mumbled speech. The defendant was wobbly and unsteady upon exiting the car. The defendant refused the roadside tests and after his arrest for DUI he refused the breath test.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton were ready for trial.
Result:	The State Dropped the DUI.

Nov 16, 2012	Case: 2012-CT-011396AXXX	Judge Evans
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving and almost striking a median. The officer observed slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and the defendant was stumbling. The officer believed that he was impaired by a chemical and/or controlled substance. He then performed the roadside tasks on video. He performed very poorly. For example, on the walk and turn test, he used his arms for balance and fell off the line. On the one leg stand, he kept dropping his foot and the test was terminated. On the alphabet test, he stated the letters out of sequence. He was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he was requested to give a urine sample. That sample revealed numerous controlled substances in the defendant's system based on the lab results.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton took the pre-trial deposition of the toxicologist who analyzed the urine sample. In deposition, the toxicologist could not state with certainty that the defendant was under the influence of those particular controlled substances at the time of driving as they could have been in his system for a lengthy amount of time.
Result:	The State Dropped the DUI.

Nov 15, 2012	Case: 11-020613MM10A	Judge Solomon
Facts:	The defendant was in a parking lot playing loud music with the windows down. In addition, the defendant was not wearing his seatbelt. When the officer approached the vehicle, the defendant started to back-up and drive away. After several commands, the defendant stopped the vehicle. The officer observed a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, slurred speech and a flushed face. Upon exiting the car, the officer noticed that the defendant was unsteady on his feet. The defendant admitted to taking Xanax as well. The defendant refused all testing and was arrested for DUI.
Result:	The motion was Granted. The DUI was DISMISSED.

Nov 15, 2012	Case: 11-020613MM10A	Judge Solomon
Facts:	The defendant was in a parking lot playing loud music with the windows down. In addition, the defendant was not wearing his seatbelt. When the officer approached the vehicle, the defendant started to back-up and drive away. After several commands, the defendant stopped the vehicle. The officer observed a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, slurred speech and a flushed face. Upon exiting the car, the officer noticed that the defendant was unsteady on his feet. The defendant admitted to taking Xanax as well. The defendant refused all testing and was arrested for DUI.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton filed a motion to suppress based on an unlawful stop. First, the statute dealing with loud music was declared unconstitutional. At the hearing, the officer testified that he was unaware at the time that the law was declared unconstitutional. The State argued that the officer could rely on a "good faith exception" despite the fact that the law was no longer valid. Parks & Braxton argued that since the DCA court had declared the law unconstitutional and published the case, the officer could no longer claim that he had a "good faith" basis to believe the law was still valid. In addition, Parks & Braxton got the officer to testify that he did not see the seatbelt violation until after he ordered the defendant to stop.
Result:	The motion was Granted. The DUI was DISMISSED.

Nov 15, 2012	Case: 11-020613MM10A	Judge Solomon
Facts:	The defendant was in a parking lot playing loud music with the windows down. In addition, the defendant was not wearing his seatbelt. When the officer approached the vehicle, the defendant started to back-up and drive away. After several commands, the defendant stopped the vehicle. The officer observed a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, slurred speech and a flushed face. Upon exiting the car, the officer noticed that the defendant was unsteady on his feet. The defendant admitted to taking Xanax as well. The defendant refused all testing and was arrested for DUI.
Result:	The motion was Granted. The DUI was DISMISSED.

Nov 15, 2012	Case: 11-020613MM10A	Judge Solomon
Facts:	The defendant was in a parking lot playing loud music with the windows down. In addition, the defendant was not wearing his seatbelt. When the officer approached the vehicle, the defendant started to back-up and drive away. After several commands, the defendant stopped the vehicle. The officer observed a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, slurred speech and a flushed face. Upon exiting the car, the officer noticed that the defendant was unsteady on his feet. The defendant admitted to taking Xanax as well. The defendant refused all testing and was arrested for DUI.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton filed a motion to suppress based on an unlawful stop. First, the statute dealing with loud music was declared unconstitutional. At the hearing, the officer testified that he was unaware at the time that the law was declared unconstitutional. The State argued that the officer could rely on a "good faith exception" despite the fact that the law was no longer valid. Parks & Braxton argued that since the DCA court had declared the law unconstitutional and published the case, the officer could no longer claim that he had a "good faith" basis to believe the law was still valid. In addition, Parks & Braxton got the officer to testify that he did not see the seatbelt violation until after he ordered the defendant to stop.
Result:	The motion was Granted. The DUI was DISMISSED.