Our Recent DUI Victories

Feb 4, 2020 Case: 19-CT-007727 Judge Farr

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for speeding and swerving. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he had fumbling fingers. The defendant had bloodshot eyes and admitted to having consumed a couple of glasses of wine. He performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.

Defense:

The officer's reports exaggerated the defendant's level of impairment as compared to the video tape. The firm pointed out all the specific details to the prosecutor. The State Dropped the DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 4, 2020 Case: 19-CT-001164 Judge Bell

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for driving erratically. He ran a stop sign, rolled past a stop bar, weaved, and almost caused a crash. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he admitted to having 2-3 beers. He performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew .186, .147, and .168 in the breath machine.

Defense:

Only two breath samples are required in the State of Florida. Here, the machine was having issues and three were obtained. Two of them were outside the margin of error.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 4, 2020 Case: 19-MM-007569 Judge Collins

Facts:

The defendant was seen by civilians driving erratically and into oncoming traffic. When officers arrived, they observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and blood shot eyes. The defendant stated she had consumed 2-3 mixed drinks. After performing the field sobriety tests, she was arrested for DUI.

Defense:

When officers arrived, the defendant was outside her car. Since there was no crash, the arrest was unlawful under Florida Statute 901.15 as no officer saw her behind the wheel.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 28, 2020 Case: 19-CT-502728 Judge Hayward

Facts:

The defendant crashed his car into a ditch. When officers arrived, they observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glossy eyes. He also swayed while he stood and appeared off balance. He told the officers under oath that a few individuals tried to rob him and there was a struggle which caused him to roll the car into the ditch. The defendant refused to perform the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's third DUI and second refusal charge.

Defense:

Under the legal doctrine of corpus delicti, there must be substantial independent evidence of a crime, other than the defendant's statements. Here, the State could not prove that the defendant was the driver other than his statement admitting to rolling the car into the ditch. The State Dismissed the defendant's Third DUI and also the refusal charge.

Result:

The DUI was dismissed.

Jan 28, 2020 Case: 19-021238MU10A Judge Levy

Facts:

The defendant was speeding and was the at fault drier in a head on collision. Upon arrival, officers observed a strong odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and unsteadiness. On video, the defendant dropped his paperwork multiple times. The defendant complained of chest injuries and was taken to the hospital. At the hospital, a DUI officer conducted an investigation and through the interview process the defendant acknowledged to drinking 4 beers. He later refused a blood test and admitted he might he might be over the legal limit. He was arrested for DUI. This was the defendant's Second offense.

Defense:

Parks & Braxton retrieved a second video. The second video revealed a DUI investigation of the victim in the crash. The State acknowledged the lack of credibility of their wheel witness and dropped the DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 27, 2020 Case: 19-CT-035684 Judge Ingram

Facts:

An anonymous person told the police that the defendant was passing in out of consciousness at a red light. The officer made contact with her and smelled an odor of alcohol. He also observed glassy eyes, slurred/mumbled speech, and she swayed as she stood. She refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. This was the defendant's Second DUI.

Defense:

Parks and Braxton filed pretrial motions to suppress evidence. The first motion was that the defendant was never given any adverse consequences when she refused field sobriety tests. Also, under Florida law, a request for a breath test must be incident to lawful arrest. Here, the officer asked for a breath test on video tape prior to her arrest. The firm then filed a motion to exclude the refusal to provide breath sample. Prior to any motion hearings, the State Dropped the defendant's Second DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 24, 2020 Case: 19-CT-039783 Judge Jacobus

Facts:

Officers saw the defendant as his car was stuck in a grassy drainage ditch. Officers observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he was staggering. The defendant's movements were slow, lethargic, and he also stated he had drank three beers and two shots. The defendant refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI.

Defense:

There was no proof that the defendant had driven while under the influence of alcohol because time had passed while the vehicle was stuck in the ditch and it was not operable when the police arrived.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 24, 2020 Case: 2019-CT-017464 Judge Bonavita

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. He also had an orbital sway. According to the officer, he failed the field sobriety tests, and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI within five years.

Defense:

In the NHTSA manual on roadside tests, it states that the area where roadside tests are performed must be level. In the police reports, the officer wrote that the area was level where he had the defendant do the walk and turn and one leg stand. However, the defense pointed out to the State that the parking lot area where they were performed was on a big slope. This was captured on tape. Thus, the roadsides were conducted in violation of the manual. The State Dropped the defendant's Second DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 22, 2020 Case: 19-CT-010416 Judge Gutman

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for driving without his headlights activated. The defendant had an odor of alcohol, lethargic movements, and glassy eyes. After performing poorly on roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .180 and a .176 in the breath machine.

Defense:

The firm was able to show that the officer's video contradicted the officer's reports. Thus, the officer's credibility was called into question.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 22, 2020 Case: 19-CT-013937 Judge Myers

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for driving with no headlights and no taillights. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot/watery eyes. After performing the roadside tasks, she was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she blew a .123 and a .117 in the breath machine.

Defense:

Under the theory of absorption and elimination of alcohol, called retrograde extrapolation, the firm was able to put the defendants breath alcohol level under a .08 at the time of driving.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 20, 2020 Case: 18-036103MU10A Judge Solomon

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for speeding, running a red light, and running a stop sign. Officers smelled an odor of alcohol as well as an odor of marijuana. They observed bloodshot eyes and slurred speech. He performed very poorly on the video taped roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath and urine tests.

Defense:

The defendant suffers from ADHD, whereby many of the characteristics he exhibits mirror the effects of alcohol impairment. Despite the fact that the defendant's performance on the field sobriety tests were less than perfect, the defendant's medical history proved as a good explanation for the impairment. The State dropped the DUI and he received no conviction.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 14, 2020 Case: 19-021210MU10A Judge Pole

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and red/glassy eyes. He also noticed the defendant swaying. The defendant had a flushed face and difficulty locating his registration, which was in his hand. The defendant performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.

Defense:

The video was inconsistent with the police reports and testimony of the officer. The State Dropped the DUI and he received no conviction.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 10, 2020 Case: 2019-CT-011168 Judge Harper for Cunningham

Facts:

The defendant was involved in a crash at a fast food restaurant parking lot. He fled the scene and went back to his neighborhood. The tag on his vehicle was run after police were called and they tracked him down. He was sitting on the ground next to the vehicle in question. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, extremely slurred/not understandable speech, and bloodshot eyes. He was unsteady, lethargic, and very argumentative. He refused to perform field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He was also charged with leaving the scene of an accident and willfully refusing to sign the DUI citation.

Defense:

Parks and Braxton pointed out to the State that the victim of the alleged crash stated that the truck was red in the 911 call. However, the truck the defendant was found sitting next to was blue. Thus, the caller's credibility about being able to actually ID the defendant as the driver was called into question. We also provided pictures to the State showing no damage. Thus, there was no "accident" as defined by case law. Therefore, the defendant could not have left the scene of an accident. If there was no actual crash initially as defined by the case law, the defendant was then being unlawfully detained by the police. The State Dropped the DUI and Dismissed all the other charges.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 8, 2020 Case: 19-CT-007318 Judge Jeske

Facts:

The defendant was the at fault driver whereby he hit two parked cars. The officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He swayed as he stood and was not making any sense in his statements to police. He refused to do roadside tests and was arrested for DUI.

Defense:

Parks & Braxton provided pictures to the State of the defendant's windshield after the crash, showing it had been shattered. The defendant's head had slammed into the windshield. Thus any impairment could have been as equally attributable to the crash versus alcohol. The State Dropped the DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 7, 2020 Case: 19-CT-013229 Judge Farr

Facts:

The defendant was stopped after an officer said the defendant cut him off. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. According to the officer, he failed the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI.

Defense:

The officer exaggerated the level of impairment in the roadside reports as compared to the video tape. The State dropped the DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 7, 2020 Case: 2019-CT-003125 Judge Jeske

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol and he admitted to having drank two cocktails. He then performed the field sobriety tests such as the one leg stand and walk and turn. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.

Defense:

An officer must have reasonable suspicion of a crime in order to request roadside tests. The officer must have specific facts that the defendant was impaired. A mere odor of alcohol is not enough with no erratic driving. Thus, all the roadside tests could have been excluded. The State Dropped the DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 7, 2020 Case: 2019-CT-013350 Judge Farr

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glassy eyes. His face was flushed, his dexterity poor, and he kept wetting his lips. He also had a flushed face and was unsteady. He refused to perform the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.

Defense:

The video contradicted the officer’s reports. The defendant did not appear unsteady and his speech appeared normal. The State Dropped the DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 7, 2020 Case: 19-CT-002237 Judge Gutman

Facts:

The defendant failed to yield the right of way and was the at fault driver in a traffic crash. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He was slow and lethargic, and he also swayed back and forth. After performing the field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .090 in the breath machine. This was the defendant's Second DUI within five years.

Defense:

The firm was able to show that the defendant's breath alcohol level was under the legal limit through a .02 margin of error. Also, the video contradicted the officer's reports as to the observations both before and during the roadside tests. The State Dropped the defendant's Second DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Dec 30, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-503372 Judge Gonzalez

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for weaving all over the road and driving east bound in the west bound lanes. The officer did not smell any alcohol but observed slurred speech. Believing she was impaired, she was then asked to perform field sobriety tests. For example, on the walk and turn, she did not walk heel to toe, stepped off the line multiple times, and was unsteady. On the one leg stand, she failed to count, used her arms for balance, and failed to keep her toe elevated. She was arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI.

Defense:

To prove DUI, the state must prove that the defendant was impaired by alcohol, and/or a controlled and/or chemical substance. Here, the defense filed a motion for statement of particulars to pin the State down as to their theory of prosecution. They could not prove what substance was allegedly impairing the defendant and the Second DUI was Dismissed.

Result:

The DUI was dismissed

Dec 30, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-011579 Judge Farr

Facts:

The defendant was involved in a crash in an intersection with another vehicle. The police alleged he ran a red light and the other vehicle had the right of way. They observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, red/glassy eyes, and slurred speech. He was asked to perform field sobriety tests to which he refused. He was arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.

Defense:

The defendant obtained the DUI video tape in discovery. For some unexplained reason, the officer did not place the defendant in front of the patrol car dash camera during the entire DUI investigation. However, we could hear the defendant speaking and his speech sounded normal, not slurred. Also, he denied that he ran the red light and said that the other driver ran the red. The State Dropped the DUI just prior to trial.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Dec 30, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-010703 Judge Farr

Facts:

The defendant crashed and rolled over his vehicle in the rain trying to avoid an object in the road. Police helped the defendant get out of the vehicle as it was upside down. They observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He swayed, appeared unsteady, and staggered. He refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI.

Defense:

The firm pointed out to the State that the defendant was injured from the crash. Any impairment such as speech issues and unsteadiness were as equally attributable to the severity of the crash versus alcohol. The State Dropped the DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Dec 20, 2019 Case: 19-CT-001163 Judge Bell

Facts:

The defendant drove up to the scene where her boyfriend was being stopped by police. Officers noticed her to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and a flushed face. She also had watery eyes and admitted to having drank beer. She performed field sobriety tests on video tape and was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she blew a .178 and a .177 in the breath machine.

Defense:

Officers saw her pull up and ordered her over to them. This was an unlawful command, because at that point, no DUI observations had been made. Thus, there was no reasonable suspicion of a crime (ie. DUI), justifying the initial command.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Dec 17, 2019 Case: 18-034710MU10A Judge Evans

Facts:

The defendant was the at fault driver in a crash whereby he failed to yield the right of way. Officers observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol and slurred speech. The defendant stated he had drank alcohol, but would not state how much. The defendant was very off balance. The defendant performed very poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Third DUI.

Defense:

There was no video at the scene. There was a video at the BAT facility. The officer made the defendant out to be a falling down drunk at the scene. However, on tape later at the BAT, the defendant was not off balance or unsteady. Also, the defendant's speech was normal and there was no slurred speech on tape. The State Dropped the defendant's Third DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Dec 11, 2019 Case: 19-CF-001453 Judge Espinosa

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for failing to maintain a single lane. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol and an odor of marijuana coming from inside the car. The defendant had slurred speech and red eyes. The officer observed two green beer bottles in the driver's door. After performing field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .179 and a .166 in the breath machine. He was also charged with having a felony controlled substance without a prescription.

Defense:

The facts surrounding the traffic stop were only vaguely described. Thus, the lawfulness of the stop was called into question. The State Dropped the DUI and the firm is now working on getting the felony dropped too.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Dec 11, 2019 Case: 19-CT-005966 Judge Mcneil

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for weaving. The officers didn't notice an odor of alcohol, however, they did observe bloodshot eyes, slow/slurred speech, and his responses were slow. The defendant was very unsteady and almost fell over. The officer even had to catch him. There was also an odor of urine on the defendant. Believing he was impaired by drugs, and not alcohol, he then performed the field sobriety tests. He performed very poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later submitted to a urine test which showed positive results for Xanax.

Defense:

There was no video at the scene. The officer's reports made no sense, in that the defendant was practically almost falling down, yet the officer still had him perform the walk the line and one leg stand.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Dec 10, 2019 Case: 19-CT-502148 Judge Swett

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for crossing over the lane markers several times. Upon contact, the officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and slurred speech. When asked for his driver's license, the defendant provided a Costco card. The defendant was unable to follow basic commands and also stumbled. He performed poorly on the videotaped roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.

Defense:

Per the NHTSA manual on roadside tests, field sobriety tests are supposed to be conducted in a well lit area. In this case, the officer had the defendant perform them in pitch black darkness. On the day of trial, the State dropped the DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Dec 10, 2019 Case: 19-CT-502148 Judge Swett

Facts:

Defense:

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Dec 6, 2019 Case: 4534-XFD Judge Martinez

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for speeding. The defendant had an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. His face was flushed and he was also very unsteady. The defendant admitted to having consumed 5 cocktails. Due to safety concerns, he was unable to perform roadside tasks. He was arrested for DUI and later blew .132 and .123 in the breath machine.

Defense:

The officer never called for an in car camera to the scene even though one was available. The defendant's story contradicted the officers alleged observations it the reports.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Dec 4, 2019 Case: 2019-MM-003023 Judge Eissey

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for straddling the center white line and driving under the speed limit. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, red/glassy eyes, and slurred speech. Her statements were inconsistent and incoherent. She stumbled and appeared confused. She refused to perform field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test. At the station, she became aggressive and allegedly kicked the officer and was also charged with Felony resisting an officer with violence.

Defense:

On the video, the officer misstated the law when requesting the defendant to perform field sobriety tests. Also, on tape, she never stumbled or appeared incoherent. The defense was also able to show that it was the officers who were aggressive with her initially back at the station and she was simply defending herself. The State Dropped the DUI and the Felony was also Dropped to a misdemeanor battery whereby she received no conviction.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Nov 26, 2019 Case: 19-CT-501958 Judge Gagliardi

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for weaving all over the road. The 911 caller which led to the stop, stated that the defendant was driving on sidewalks and almost striking cars. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, mumbled speech, and bloodshot eyes. The defendant agreed to perform the field sobriety tests. For example, on the walk and turn, he took an incorrect number of steps, almost fell, and missed heel to toe. On the one leg stand, the defendant only made it two seconds before he put his foot down, swayed, and used his arms for balance. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.

Defense:

Through pre-trial discovery, Parks & Braxton discovered that the civilian 911 caller had stayed on scene and was filming the field sobriety tests. It should be noted that the officer did not have an in-car camera or a body worn camera. The firm requested that video because we alleged that it would show that the officer was exaggerating the defendant's level of impairment. The officer made no effort to get a copy from the witness and no effort was made by the State to get a copy. Due to the lack of videotape evidence in the case, the State Dropped the DUI.

Result:

The State Dropped the DUI.

Nov 22, 2019 Case: 18-036116MU10A Judge Pole

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for speeding, failing to stop at a red light, and weaving. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and she admitted to drinking alcohol. She stated to the officer that she had been through this before. After performing the roadside tests, she was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she blew a .090 in the breath machine.

Defense:

Parks & Braxton was able to get the defendant's statements excluded. In addition, since the defendant's breath was over an hour later, the State could not prove that the defendant was over the legal limit at the time of driving. The State Dropped the DUI and she received no conviction on her record.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Nov 21, 2019 Case: 19-CT-034868 Judge T. Brown

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for jerking the steering wheel and erratically braking. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot glassy eyes, and she was unsteady. The defendant stated she had one drink earlier in the day. After performing roadsides tests, she was arrested for DUI.

Defense:

There was no probable cause to believe any traffic infraction occurred, nor any reasonable suspicion of a crime that the defendant was an impaired driver justifying the lawfulness of the traffic stop. The State Dropped the DUI and the defendant received no criminal conviction on her record.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Nov 19, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-009305 Judge Conrad

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for speeding (85 mph in a 55 mph zone). The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and fumbling fingers. He also had bloodshot eyes and unstable balance. The defendant admitted to having consumed three Crown Royal whiskey drinks. After performing the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand exercises, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .135 and a .133 in the breath machine.

Defense:

The defendant's performance on the field sobriety tests on video tape clearly showed that he was still absorbing alcohol and his breath alcohol content may have been lower than .08 at the time of driving. It should be noted that the breath test as taken almost 90 minutes after the traffic stop.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Nov 19, 2019 Case: 19-CT-041668 Judge Koenig

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for speeding (80 mph in a 50 mph zone) and weaving in and out of traffic. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slightly slurred speech, and bloodshot/watery eyes. The defendant was also slow exiting the car. He refused to perform field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.

Defense:

Due to the defendant not performing the roadside tests, it was apparent on tape there was a lack of probable cause to arrest the defendant. The State Dropped the DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Nov 18, 2019 Case: 19-CT-019013 Judge Damico

Facts:

The defendant was stopped after failing to stop at a red light. The red light camera flashed numerous times. The officer then proceeded through traffic to stop the defendant. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant stated he had drank a couple of glasses of wine. He refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.

Defense:

Parks & Braxton showed that the defendant never ran the red light and that the officer never obtained the red light camera. From his vantage point, and traffic, there was no way he could have seen the defendant run a red light. Thus, the lawfulness of the stop was called into question and so was the officer's credibility.

Result:

The DUI was dismissed.

Nov 18, 2019 Case: 19-CT-015564 Judge Jeske

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for weaving all over the road. Upon contact, the officer observed the defendant to be lethargic, have bloodshot eyes, and he swayed. The defendant admitted to having smoked pot with some friends prior to driving. After performing field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later provided a urine sample which tested positive for marijuana at the FDLE lab.

Defense:

Parks & Braxton provided evidence to the State regarding the defendant's car, showing the alignment and tires were messed up which would have caused it to swerve. Also we pointed out to the State that on tape there was no probable cause to arrest the defendant for DUI. The State agreed and Dismissed the DUI.

Result:

The DUI was dismissed.

Nov 15, 2019 Case: 2019-MM-034754 Judge Atkin

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for swerving. The defendant had an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and was unsteady. He admitted to having drank 3 beers and was also swaying. He performed poorly on the roadside tests. For example, on the walk and turn, he stepped off the line, lost his balance while turning, and took an incorrect number of steps. On the one leg stand, he put his foot down, hopped and swayed. He was then arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. He was also charged with possession of marijuana.

Defense:

The firm raised issues of the lawfulness of the traffic stop due to other traffic not being affected by his driving. The State Dropped the DUI and the possession charge was dismissed.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Nov 13, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-001887 Judge Myers

Facts:

The defendant struck a median and a FDOT sign causing damage. A police officer observed the crash and stopped the defendant. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/glassy eyes, and slurred speech. She was unsteady exiting her car, swayed as she stood, and stated she had drank two cocktails. Due to safety concerns, no roadside tests were conducted and she was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test.

Defense:

The video contradicted the majority of the officer's observations as written in the reports.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 31, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-011030 Judge Farr

Facts:

The defendant was found by police passed out in his car in a parking lot. The officers made contact with him to assess his well being. The officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He admitted to having drank 4 beers. After performing poorly on the roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .185 and a .183 in the breath machine.

Defense:

Since the defendant was sleeping in his car, he was not in actual physical control. He had no "capability" to operate the vehicle while sleeping.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 30, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-009273 Judge Jeske

Facts:

The defendant was found passed out in his car. The officers noticed an odor of alcohol upon awakening the defendant. They also noticed that he was unsteady, had glassy eyes, and slurred speech. He performed poorly on the roadside tests. For example, on the walk and turn, he stepped off the line and was not walking heel to toe. On the finger to nose, he missed the tip of his nose several times. He was arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test.

Defense:

For the police to order someone out of their car, the officers must have reasonable suspicion of crime. In other words, there must be some specific facts to point too that the defendant was impaired, and not just innocently sleeping. Here, there was none. Thus, the initial ordering of the defendant out of his car was unlawful and all the evidence could have been thrown out. The State Dropped the DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 30, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-007931 Judge

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for driving with her high beam lights on at night. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and fumbling fingers. She also had slurred speech and admitted to having drank vodka/cranberry. After performing the field sobriety tests, she was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she blew a .149 and a .160 in the breath machine.

Defense:

On video, it appeared as if one officer was training the other. The trainee mixed up several parts of the instructions on the field sobriety tests in contradiction to the NHTSA manual on roadsides The State Dropped the DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 29, 2019 Case: 19-001027MU10A Judge M. Brown

Facts:

The defendant was the at fault driver in a crash whereby he hit a pole. He was found in his car, a little bit down the road. The officers observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glassy/bloodshot eyes. He appeared to be in a daze, unsteady, lethargic, and stumbling. He was asked to perform roadside tests to which he refused. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test. He was also charged with leaving the scene of an accident.

Defense:

Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. The arresting officer's own body worn camera contradicted his written reports. The defendant was not off balance, stumbling or unsteady. In addition, the officer misstated the law when asking for roadside tests by telling him that his license will be suspended. A license suspension only applies to a refusal to provide breath, blood, or urine. On the day of trial the State Dropped the DUI and he received no conviction in his record. They also Dismissed the leaving the scene of the accident because the defendant simply pulled down the road to get away from the wires.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 28, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-000772 Judge Tinlin

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for speeding and swerving. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, a flushed face, and slurred speech. The defendant admitted to having drank wine, swayed, staggered, and was disoriented. She performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .191 and a .189 in the breath machine.

Defense:

The officer misstated the law and coerced the defendant into taking a breath test. Thus, the breath test may have been excluded from evidence.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 24, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-502000 Judge Gagliardi

Facts:

The defendant was the at fault driver in a crash whereby she made a wide turn and hit another car. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, thick tongue speech, and bloodshot eyes. She admitted to having consumed 4 to 5 drinks. She performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she blew a .107 and a .107 in the breath machine.

Defense:

There was no video at the scene. The officer's reports were very vague as to the specifics of the defendant's performance on the roadside tests. Also, the defendant was not administered the breath test for a few hours after her arrest. Thus, there was no way to extrapolate back as to whether she was above or below .08 at the time of driving.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 22, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-012250 Judge Conrad

Facts:

The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, a pale face, and she was off balance. She also had slurred/thick tongued speech. She refused to perform field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI.

Defense:

Under Florida law, a breath test can only be requested after arrest. Here, the officer asked for a breath test prior to arrest. Thus, the defendant's refusal to provide a breath test would have been inadmissible. Also, the officer never gave the defendant any adverse consequences when she refused roadside tests. Thus, her refusal to perform field sobriety tests would have also been inadmissible. The state Dropped the defendant's second DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 21, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-013949 Judge Myers

Facts:

The defendant was found passed out at an intersection traffic light. Multiple attempts were taken to try to awaken her. After breaking the window to get her up, the officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. She was extremely off balance and couldn't perform all the field sobriety tests. She was arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test. The defendant also has another open DUI pending.

Defense:

Due to the video tape not being provided in a timely fashion, the firm was able to get the State to Drop the DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 17, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-030556 Judge Babb

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for weaving. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, a flushed/red face, and bloodshot eyes. The defendant could not recall how much alcohol he had drank. After performing the roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .144 and a .140 in the breath machine.

Defense:

The defendant was coerced into taking a breath test. Specifically, the officer told him that if he blew under a .08, he would only get a ticket. The defendant was led to believe that he could be released from custody if he agreed to blow in to the machine. An officer cannot dangle freedom when trying to obtain a breath test. One will not be unarrested once taken in to the jail after being arrested for DUI. Thus, the breath test results would have been excluded.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 17, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-032878 Judge Babb

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for traveling at a slow rate of speed and leaving the roadway twice into the grass. Upon contact, the officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and watery eyes. She stumbled, staggered, swayed, and was clumsy. She admitted she should not have been driving. She performed poorly on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .126 and a .125 in the breath machine.

Defense:

The lawfulness of the traffic stop was called into question. Here, no traffic was affected by her slow driving and the leaving the road two times. She also did not endanger anyone with her driving. Thus, there was no probable cause to effect the traffic stop. The State Dropped the DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 17, 2019 Case: 2019-CF-035695 Judge Koenig

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, glassy/bloodshot eyes, and he admitted to having consumed two beers. After performing the HGN (eye test), one leg stand, and walk and turn exercises, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. In a search subsequent to arrest, the officer also discovered cocaine and the defendant as charged with felony possession.

Defense:

In order to lawfully request a defendant to perform roadside tasks, there must reasonable suspicion of a crime. In other words, there must be some evidence that the defendant was impaired. Here, there was no erratic driving, no balance issues, and no speech issues. Thus, all the field sobriety test would have been inadmissible. The State Dropped the DUI and firm is working on trying to get the felony dismissed.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 16, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-005001 Judge Mcneil

Facts:

The defendant was found passed out in his car at a gas pump. It took numerous attempts to try to awaken the defendant. Upon awakening the defendant, the officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glossy eyes. After performing the field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.

Defense:

The officers’ reports were very vaguely written. The video of the defendant contradicted many of the observations on the reports. The week before trial, the State Dropped the DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 15, 2019 Case: AAZ7LUE Judge Riba

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for speeding and driving without lights. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and a flushed face. After performing numerous roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .081 in the breath machine.

Defense:

Based on the margin of error built into the breath machine, the State was unable to prove that the defendant was above the legal limit of .08. The State Dropped the DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 15, 2019 Case: AALFX2E Judge Riba

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for weaving. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he had slow reactions. He also had a flushed face and admitted to having drank gin and tonics. According to the officer, he failed the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.

Defense:

The officer exaggerated the defendant's alleged impairment on the field sobriety tests. His video contradicted all the reports.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 15, 2019 Case: 18-028556MU10A Judge Gottlieb

Facts:

The police received a call regarding an intoxicated woman who just left a bar. At the same time, a call was placed to 911 regarding a female who was being followed by a man. The police located both vehicles with the woman parked on the side of the road with the engine running. The officer approached the female and observed characteristics of impairment. Specifically, he observed a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, as well as slurred speech. The initial officer called for a DUI task force officer. The DUI officer arrived and conducted field sobriety tests. The defendant was arrested and blew .087 in the breath machine. In addition, the defendant provided a urine sample and tested positive for three (3) controlled substances.

Defense:

Parks & Braxton filed a motion to compel the 911 call. It was later revealed that the 911 call was destroyed. Depositions were taken from both officers. In deposition, the officers agreed that they should have investigated the male who was parked behind the defendant. Parks and Braxton filed a motion to dismiss based on a necessity defense. Specifically, the defendant was legally entitled to commit a DUI in order to avoid the greater harm of being assaulted by the man who was following her. The Prosecutor agreed and subsequently dropped the DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 15, 2019 Case: 2493-XBG Judge Nunez

Facts:

The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash. Officers noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, thick tongued speech, and he was stumbling around. He also swayed and admitted to having drank beer. He performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI.

Defense:

Although the defendant performed the walk and turn, one leg stand, and HGN (eye test), nothing was captured on video tape. All the officers had body worn cameras but not one roadside task was on tape. This lack of evidence was presented to the State and they Dropped the DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 10, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-039403 Judge T. Brown

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for driving on a flat tire at a very low speed. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he stated he had consumed 3 beers. The defendant appeared slow, clumsy, he swayed, and he also staggered. After performing the field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .103 and a .102 in the breath machine.

Defense:

There is a .02 and a .005 margin of the error with the breath machine. Here, the firm was able to place both of the defendant's breath test results under the legal limit.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 8, 2019 Case: 2019-CM-003455 Judge Gutman

Facts:

The defendant's car was struck in a ditch. When police arrived, the defendant and her boyfriend were on the scene. Upon contact with the defendant, the officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and slurred speech. For some reason, the defendant walked away from the police and jumped in her boyfriend's vehicle. Officers immediately stopped her and pulled her out of the truck. She then became verbally abusive and refused to perform any field sobriety tests. She was arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI within five years.

Defense:

Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State that there was not enough evidence to place in her in actual physical control. The officers yanked her out of the driver seat before she could gain control of the truck. The State agreed and Dropped the defendant's Second DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 8, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-008399 Judge Farr

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for driving with no headlights. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, watery/glassy eyes, and she admitted to having consumed three vodka cranberry drinks. According to the officer, she performed poorly on the roadside tasks and was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she blew a .109 and a .106 in the breath machine.

Defense:

It was pointed out to the State by the firm that the defendant’s alleged performance on the roadside tasks, as written in the reports, was contradicted by her video tape. The tape clearly showed that she was absorbing alcohol and had a lower breath alcohol level at the time of driving.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 8, 2019 Case: 2019-MM-001632 Judge Woodard

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for speeding, The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and thick tongued speech. He then performed numerous field sobriety tests, such as the walk and turn, one leg stand, and finger to nose. He was then arrested for DUI and later blew a .130 and a .131 in the breath machine.

Defense:

There were inconsistencies between the reports and the videotapes. Thus, the credibility of the officers was called into question.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 4, 2019 Case: 19-CT-006693 Judge Smith

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for violating the right of way and almost causing a collision with a police officer. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and he appeared unsteady on his feet. A DUI officer was called to administer roadside tests. The defendant performed very poorly and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .187 and a .183 in the breath machine.

Defense:

During discovery, the firm uncovered that the arresting officer had been terminated for falsification of records and untruthfulness. His credibility as to whether he lied in this case was now called into question. The DUI was Dismissed.

Result:

The DUI was dismissed.

Oct 4, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-002080CTAXWS Judge Roberts

Facts:

The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash. When the officer arrived, he observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/glossy eyes, and his answers to the officer's questions were not coherent. The defendant admitted to having drank beer and there was a bottle of vodka and a 12 pack of beer in the defendant's vehicle. He performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.

Defense:

Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. Just prior to the trial date, the firm uncovered that the arresting officer had been terminated after having been arrested on felony charges. The State was also late in providing any discovery such as police reports and video tapes. The firm would not waive speedy trial and moved to compel further info about officer and all discovery. Just a few days prior to trial, the State Dropped the DUI and the defendant received no criminal conviction on his record.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 3, 2019 Case: 19-009212MU10A Judge Levy

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for inoperable tag lights and swerving. After observing an odor of alcohol, and the defendant stating he had drank 2-3 beers, the officer requested the defendant perform field sobriety tests. The defendant performed very poorly. For example, on the walk and turn, he raised his arms for balance, missed heel to toe, and stepped off the line. On the one leg stand, he raised his arms for balance and put his foot down. He was arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's second DUI.

Defense:

Parks & Braxton filed a pretrial motion to suppress the evidence. In our motion, we alleged that the defendant was unlawfully detained. We argued at the motion hearing that there must be more than a mere odor of alcohol in order to detain a defendant to perform to field sobriety tests. The Judge agreed and granted the motion and threw out all of the evidence. The DUI was then Dismissed.

Result:

The DUI was dismissed.

Oct 2, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-005902 Judge Myers

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for driving with no tail lights and having his daylight running lights on after dark. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and a flushed face. He stated he had drank two beers, appeared unsteady, and swayed while he stood. He was arrested for DUI after performing several roadside tasks. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI.

Defense:

According to the NHTSA manual on field sobriety tests, the officer is required to administer them on flat, level surface. Here, it was obvious on tape that the officer had the defendant perform the walk and turn on a downhill slope. Although the officer wrote that the defendant had no medical injuries preventing him from performing the one leg stand, that was contradicted by the video. On tape the defendant his heard telling the officer that he had hip issues. This was pointed out to the State and they Dropped the DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 25, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-007356 Judge Gutman

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for swerving into the bike lane, speeding, and almost hitting a curb. He had an odor of alcohol, glassy/bloodshot eyes, and he stated he had nothing to drink. He then performed the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand tests. He was then arrested for DUI and later blew a .140 and a .133 in breath machine.

Defense:

Due to the fact that there were no balance problems or speech issues prior to the roadside tasks, there was a lack of reasonable suspicion to even request field sobriety tests. An odor of alcohol and bloodshot/glassy eyes are only indicators of the consumption of alcohol and not impairment.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 24, 2019 Case: 19-CT-003598 Judge Conrad

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for driving at a high rate of speed and almost colliding with a median. He was also weaving and drifting. Since the defendant did not obey commands to remain in the car with hands visible, he was immediately handcuffed until the DUI officer arrived. The officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and watery/red eyes. Once the DUI officer arrived, He only performed the HGN and then refused to perform and further roadsides. He was then arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.

Defense:

There was a de facto arrest when the officers placed the defendant in handcuffs. Since all the DUI observations were made after being cuffed, there was a lack of probable cause to arrest the defendant. The State Dropped the DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 24, 2019 Case: 19-CT-004152 Judge Jeske

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for weaving and drifting. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, vomit on his clothing, droopy eyes, and slurred speech. His eyes were bloodshot and he appeared unsteady. He performed very poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .184 and a .183 in the breath machine.

Defense:

The lawfulness of the traffic stop was called into question due to a lack of specifics. The State Dropped the DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 23, 2019 Case: 19-CT-501522 Judge Paluck

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, a flushed face, droopy eye lids, and bloodshot eyes. He then performed the battery of field sobriety tests. According to the officer, he failed and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.

Defense:

Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. We pointed out to the State that the officer's reports were contradicted by the video. Not one of the defendant's normal faculties were impaired. On the day of trial, the State Dropped the DUI and he received no conviction on his record.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 13, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-021284 Judge Koenig

Facts:

The defendant was involved in a hit and run accident. When officers found him, he was inside his house and he eventually came out to speak to them. He had an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he was very unsteady to the point of stumbling and staggering. He performed very poorly on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.

Defense:

Under Florida law, one must be under the influence of alcohol "at the time of driving" to be convicted of DUI. Here, the State could not prove that he was under the influence while driving because he could have drank while he was in his house.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 13, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-030312 Judge Jacobus

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, slurred speech, and he fumbled with his documents. He also moved very slow and swayed. After performing the HGN (eye test), one leg stand and walk and turn tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.

Defense:

The officer did not get an angle of onset (nystagmus) before 45 degrees in the defendant's eyes during the HGN test. An angle of onset prior to 45 degrees, under Tharpe's formula, would show that the defendant may have a breath alcohol level over the legal limit of .08. Here, there was none.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 13, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-022158 Judge Koenig

Facts:

A 911 call was made to police regarding the defendant's erratic driving. Officers located the defendant's car and stopped him. Officers observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, poor balance, and repetitive speech. The defendant performed poorly on the roadside tasks and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .129 and a .128 in the breath machine. This was the defendant's Second DUI arrest.

Defense:

Since there was no substantial corroboration of the driving pattern that the 911 caller had described. Thus the lawfulness of the stop was called into question.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 13, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-030328 Judge Jacobus

Facts:

A BOLO went out about a reckless driver. The officer spotted the car in question driven by the defendant, and observed her making a wide turn and drifting. After conducting a traffic stop, the officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and slurred speech, She swayed, stumbled, and seemed confused. The defendant refused to perform the roadside tasks other than HGN (eyes test) and was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test.

Defense:

The defendant was not advised of any adverse consequences relating to her refusal to perform the roadside tasks as required by law.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 13, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-029498 Judge Koenig

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for sitting at a green light for several seconds and then swerving. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/glassy eyes, and he stated that he had consumed a couple of drinks. He also had a flushed face and swayed. After performing the field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .170 and a .169 in the breath machine.

Defense:

Since the defendant did not sit through an entire light cycle, and there were no specifics of his alleged swerving. Thus the lawfulness of the traffic stop was called into question.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 11, 2019 Case: 19-CT-004194 Judge Gutman

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for swerving and driving too slow. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and diminished dexterity. He also appeared disoriented, had glassy/watery eyes, and unsteady balance. The defendant refused to perform the roadside tasks and was arrested for DUI. Upon being asked to provide a breath test, the defendant refused and stated, "I ain’t providing you shit."

Defense:

The observations that the officer wrote in his report were contradicted by the videotape. This was brought to the State's attention and the DUI was Dropped.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 11, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-003481 Judge Nimeth

Facts:

The defendant was found passed out by officers in the parking lot of a hotel. Upon contact, the officer noticed mumbling speech, he appeared sleepy and dazed, and he admitted to consuming one beer (no odor of alcohol was observed ). He used the car for support and a beer was found in the car. The officer, believing he was impaired by alcohol, then had him perform field sobriety tests. He was then arrested for DUI. He later took a breath test. Due to the breath alcohol level not being consistent with the impairment level that the officer observed, a DRE (drug recognition officer) was called in. The defendant then submitted to a full DRE drug exam. The defendant admitted to being a pot smoker and also taking some unknown white pill. He also provided a urine sample which came back from FDLE positive for marijuana.

Defense:

Parks & Braxton brought several contradictions between the arresting officer and the DRE officer to the attention of the prosecutor. For one, the officer at the scene got no nystagmus prior to 45 degrees on the HGN (eye test) versus the DRE officer at the station got nystagmus prior to the 45 degrees. This is important because the DRE officer concluded that the defendant was impaired by a CNS depressant, and NOT marijuana which is the substance he tested positive for at FDLE. An officer wont see nystagmus prior to 45 degrees if under the influence of marijuana. The DRE was wrong. The firm then requested the state to disclose which "specific" controlled substance the state was going to argue that the defendant was impaired by as required by law. They could not and the DUI was dismissed.

Result:

The DUI was dismissed.

Aug 30, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-025238 Judge T. Brown

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for drifting and driving too slow. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and the defendant had difficulty locating his paperwork. His speech was slurred, he had a flushed face, and he swayed. After performing the roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .132 and a .129 in the breath machine.

Defense:

During the short distance and time frame that the officer followed the defendant, his alleged drifting did not affect other traffic and neither did his driving too slow for conditions. Thus, the lawfulness of the traffic stop was called into question. The State Dropped the DUI and he received no conviction on his record.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 28, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-002266 Judge Rada

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for speeding. Upon contact, the officer observed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and mumbling speech. He was slow in his movements and he admitted to drinking wine. After refusing to do roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.

Defense:

The video contradicted the reports. For example, his speech was not mumbled and he wasn't moving slow. The State, after negotiations, Dropped the DUI short of going to trial.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 27, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-000772AX Judge Henderson

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for speeding and weaving. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he fumbled with his documents. He had slurred/mumbled speech and he dropped his wallet on the ground. He also swayed and moved slow. After performing the roadside tasks such as the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .141 and a .141 in the breath machine.

Defense:

The video contradicted the officer's reports and clearly showed that the defendant's level of impairment was consistent with someone who was lower than .141 at the time of driving. To prove DUI, one has to be "driving" with an unlawful breath alcohol level.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 26, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-027913 Judge Atkin

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for weaving. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, glassy/watery eyes, slurred speech, and he was slow in his movements. He swayed while he stood and admitted to having consumed whiskey with water. According to the officer, he performed poorly on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .109 and a .112 in the breath machine.

Defense:

The lawfulness of the traffic stop was called into question as the alleged weaving did not rise to the level of reasonable suspicion of a crime justifying pulling him over.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 19, 2019 Case: A9EVMRE Judge Mckuyton

Facts:

The defendant was found inside his car and he was in the driver's seat parked against a curb. His car was facing in the wrong direction which is an infraction. The officer had the defendant roll his window down. The officer then noticed an odor of alcohol and bloodshot/watery eyes. He admitted to having consumed 3 beers and then performed field sobriety tests. He was then arrested for DUI and later blew a .127 and a .126 in the breath machine.

Defense:

There was insufficient reasonable suspicion of a crime (i.e. not enough specific articulable facts other than odor and bloodshot eyes) to justify the initial detention of the defendant. Thus, if the initial detention was unlawful, all of the roadside tests and breath test would be excluded from evidence.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 14, 2019 Case: 2019-CM-005082 Judge Smith

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for speeding and weaving. She had an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. She swayed while she stood and made conflicting statements. She performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She was also charged with possession of pot which was found in the car after her arrest.

Defense:

The officer made the defendant out to be more impaired in his reports than she appeared on tape. The State Dropped the DUI and the possession of pot charge was dismissed.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 13, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-001499 Judge Gutman

Facts:

The defendant was found passed out by police. His car was in a turning lane. Upon awakening the defendant, he had an odor of alcohol and bloodshot/red eyes. He performed very poorly on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.

Defense:

The video of the defendant contradicted the officer's reports as to the extent of the alleged impairment. The State Dropped the DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 13, 2019 Case: 2018-CT-009675 Judge Pattey

Facts:

An officer was doing a routine safety check at a rest area. An unnamed person drove up to the officer and asked if he was looking for the driver of the car that was parked on the grass. He also told the officer the the individual in question (i.e. the defendant) seemed highly intoxicated and was stumbling around. The officer then saw the defendant stumbling around the parking lot toward his patrol car. The officer made contact and observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he was very off balance. The defendant stated he had drank a half bottle of whiskey and was stopping to get a drink of water and sleep it off. He admitted to being the driver of the vehicle parked on the grass. He was then requested to perform field sobriety tests. He performed very poorly and was arrested for DUI . He later refused the breath test.

Defense:

Parks & Braxton filed two pretrial motions to suppress. The first alleged that the arrest was unlawful under 901.15 of the Florida Statutes. In short, it states that when there is no crash, the officer must observe all elements of the misdemeanor. Here, a DUI, the officer must have observed the defendant behind the wheel. An officer cannot rely on a civilian when there is no crash. Thus, the arrest was unlawful. The firm also filed a motion to exclude all of the defendant's statements about being the driver. Since the officer never got the witness's name, the person was anonymous. Thus, since there was no way to call him into court, his statements would be inadmissible hearsay and excluded from evidence. Under the doctrine of corpus delicti, the State must produce substantial evidence that the defendant was the driver other than his own admissions. Here, there was none. On the day of the motion hearing, the State Dropped the DUI and the defendant received no conviction on his record.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 12, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-000800 Judge S. Jewett

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for driving the wrong way. Officers observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, watery eyes, and he admitted to having drank a couple of beers. He performed poorly on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .131 and a .131 in the breath machine.

Defense:

It was pointed out to he State that the defendant merely crossed the lane marker briefly to make a turn and the officer exaggerated the driving pattern in his reports. Since the lawfulness of the stop was called into question, the State Dropped the DUI and the defendant received no coviction in his record.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 9, 2019 Case: 2019-MM-002010 Judge Eissey

Facts:

The defendant was stopped after driving the wrong way toward oncoming traffic, almost causing a collision. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol and an odor of marijuana. He had bloodshot eyes and slurred speech. He performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused breath and urine tests. The defendant was also charged with possession of marijuana which was found in his car.

Defense:

Although the officer described the defendant as a falling down drunk in his reports, he had a video camera in the patrol car. However, the firm discovered that the defendant's field sobriety tests were not captured on tape for unknown reasons. This was brought to the State's attention and they Dropped the DUI. The marijuana charge was Dismissed.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 6, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-007128 Judge Conrad

Facts:

The defendant was stopped as he was trying to get through the gate at an air force base. Officers were called and they observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he admitted to having drank 4 beers. After performing the field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .166 and a .162 it the breath machine.

Defense:

Since the defendant never got through the gate, there was no reasonable suspicion of a crime justifying the detention of the defendant.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 6, 2019 Case: 17-026385MU10A Judge Mollica

Facts:

A call went out to police about an erratic driver. Police then found the vehicle stopped at a red light. The caller pointed the car out to police stating that it was the vehicle in question. The vehicle accelerated quickly thought the light, its tires squealed, and it fishtailed. Thee officers were behind the car, he weaved all over the road. Upon stopping him, the officers observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He had to brace himself while standing and he was off balance. The defendant performed very poorly on the field sobriety tests. He was arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's third DUI.

Defense:

During depositions it was revealed that a civilian witness had taken a video of the defendant that the arresting officer was aware of, but failed to preserve. In addition, the officers failed to preserve a video that was taken in the holding cell. Finally, a deposition of a back-up officer revealed several inconsistencies with the arresting officer. Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. The case was dropped by the State on the morning of trial.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 6, 2019 Case: 18-022831MU10A Judge Evans

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for speeding and running a red light. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, mumbled speech, and bloodshot eyes. She had a flushed face and swayed while she stood. She refused roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test.

Defense:

Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. The video that was taken at the BAT facility contradicted the officer’s observations at the scene. For example on tape, her speech wasn't mumbled and she wasn't swaying. On the day of trial, the State Dropped the DUI and she received no conviction in her record.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 6, 2019 Case: 18-036110MU10A Judge Levy

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for speeding. He was alleged to have been driving 106 mph in a 65 mph zone. Officers observed an odor of alcohol and detained the defendant for a DUI investigation. The defendant also stated he had drank 4 beers and he was asked to perform roadside tasks. He refused and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.

Defense:

Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. On the day of trial, it was pointed out to the State that the officer did not advise the defendant of any adverse consequences for refusing the roadside tasks. Thus, his refusal would have been inadmissible into evidence. Also, there was no reasonable suspicion of any crime justifying the detention of the defendant based on the facts alleged above. On the day of jury trial, the State Dropped the DUI and he received No conviction on his record.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 1, 2019 Case: 2018-CF-015465 Judge Nash

Facts:

The defendant was the at fault driver in a crash whereby he cut in front of another driver. Two people were injured in the crash. He then left the scene and was found by police. They observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, and trouble with his balance. He refused roadside tests and was arrested for Leaving the Scene of an accident with injury (Felony) and DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was also the defendant's Second DUI.

Defense:

Prior to taking pretrial depositions, the defense uncovered via discovery that the defendant actually only left the scene to call 911 because he didn't have a cell. Also, it was actually the victim's mom who told him to leave and call 911 and/or get help. The State Dropped the felony leaving the scene of an accident charge. They also Dropped the defendant's Second DUI as the defendant was never advised of any adverse consequences for refusing to perform field sobriety tests a required by law.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 1, 2019 Case: 18-035514MU10A Judge Diaz

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for having an expired tag. The officers noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, he stated that he "had a few," his eyes were red/watery, and he was swaying while he stood. The defendant refused to perform roadside tasks and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.

Defense:

Parks & Braxton filed a pretrial motion to suppress. In our motion, we alleged that there was no reasonable suspicion of crime justifying the detention of the defendant. The video showed that he was not swaying and that he was responsive and coherent. The State conceded the motion and Dropped the DUI. The defendant received no conviction on his record.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 31, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-003059 Judge Gutman

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for improper lane change and following to closely. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glassy/watery eyes. He performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest he blew a .133 and a .116 in the breath machine.

Defense:

Parks & Braxton called the lawfulness of the traffic stop into question as his alleged "improper lane changes" were only vaguely described. The State Dropped the DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 31, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-003069 Judge Gutman

Facts:

Officers made contact with defendant after security at a bar stated that defendant was highly intoxicated. Officers then stopped the defendant as she was pulling out of the parking lot. They then observed her to have an odor of alcohol and bloodshot eyes. The defendant stated she had drank two beers. She performed poorly on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she blew a .168 and .166 in the breath machine.

Defense:

Parks & Braxton firm pointed out to the State that there was only a conclusory statement about her intoxication, without any specific facts. Under the law, there must be some facts supporting the conclusion. Thus, the initial seizure of the defendant was unlawful.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 23, 2019 Case: 19-CT-007521MU10A Judge Diaz

Facts:

Officers responded to a vehicle crash, whereby the vehicle hit a light pole. When officers arrived, they came in contact with the defendant and his wife. They noticed an odor of alcohol on the defendant, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He admitted to drinking beer and mixed drinks, and he also appeared very unsteady. The defendant stated his wife had been driving at the time of the crash and he only got in the car after the crash to see if could move it from the crash scene. The officers also had the defendant perform roadsides. He performed very poorly and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .174 and a .171 in the breath machine. It should be noted his wife was also arrested for DUI.

Defense:

Prior to trial, the firm was able to prove that the vehicle was inoperable after the crash and at the time that the defendant entered the car. Under Florida law, if the vehicle became inoperable before the person drove or wasn’t in actual physical control while impaired, they could not be convicted of DUI. On the day of trial the DUI was Dismissed.

Result:

The DUI was dismissed.

Jul 23, 2019 Case: 18-027325MU10A Judge M. Brown

Facts:

The defendant was found passed out in his car on the shoulder of the road. Upon awakening the defendant, the officer observed an odor of alcohol and appeared unsteady. He was asked to exit the car and perform field sobriety tests. He performed very poorly. For example, on the walk and turn, the defendant stepped off the line, took an incorrect number of steps, and used his arms for balance. On the one leg stand, he put his foot down and could not complete the exercise. He was arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.

Defense:

Parks & Braxton took pretrial depositions of the two officers involved in the case. At the depo, the firm was able to question the officers and establish numerous inconsistencies in their testimony. The firm then filed a pretrial motion to suppress all the evidence. The firm not only argued that there was no legal basis to detain the defendant, but also that the officers were not credible. The Judge granted the motion and threw out all of the the evidence. The DUI was Dismissed.

Result:

The DUI was dismissed.

Jul 18, 2019 Case: 19-0001872MU10A Judge Gottlieb

Facts:

The defendant was found passed out in her car in the roadway. Upon awakening the defendant, the officers observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. After refusing to perform roadsides, she was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test.

Defense:

Parks & Braxton took pretrial depositions of the two officers involved in the case. Upon questioning officer, the firm was able to impeach each officer with their own police reports, as well as the video. In addition, the defense was able to get each officer to provide conflicting testimony. After providing the two depos to the State, they Dropped the DUI and the defendant received no conviction on her record.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 17, 2019 Case: 2018-CT-019817 Judge Weis

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for speeding and failing to stop at a red light. According to the officer, he was traveling close to 100 mph. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He fumbled through his paperwork and seemed confused. The defendant refused to perform roadside exercises and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI within five years.

Defense:

The officer who conducted the traffic stop called for a DUI unit. However, the officer never asked for unit with an in car camera, even though others were available to film the defendant. Also, the defendant was never advised of any adverse consequences for refusing to perform the field sobriety exercises as required by case law. The State Dropped the defendant's Second DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 16, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-001802 Judge Smith

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for driving with no headlights and also hitting a curb. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and she was unsteady on her feet. Her speech was slurred at times and she admitted to having drank a couple of glasses of wine. After performing the field sobriety tests, she was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she blew a .151 and a .145 in the breath machine.

Defense:

The video contradicted the officer's reports as to the specifics of her actual performance on the field sobriety tests, her speech pattern, and her balance.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 3, 2019 Case: 18-CT-019685 Judge Myers

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He also fumbled around with his documents. According to the officer, he failed the roadside tasks and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI.

Defense:

The firm announced ready to set the case for trial. Prior to trial, the firm pointed out numerous inconsistencies in the officer's reports and also contradictions as compared to the videotape. The State Dropped the DUI.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 2, 2019 Case: 2019-CT-000881 Judge Farr

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for weaving, swerving, and sitting through traffic light cycles. The officer observed her to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and she gave inconsistent statements. She performed poorly on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she blew a .130 and a .119 in the breath machine.

Defense:

The video contradicted the officer's report as to many aspects of the alleged impairment. The State Dropped the DUI and she received no conviction.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Jun 26, 2019 Case: 19-CT-005000 Judge Castor

Facts:

The defendant was stopped for speeding. The defendant had an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he admitted to having drank beer. He was unsteady on his feet and also swayed. He then performed numerous field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest he blew. a .204 and a .197 in the breath machine.

Defense:

When the officer turned on his police lights to initiate the traffic stop, the defendant did not stop immediately. He kept driving a bit until he reached his house. The officer ordered him out of the vehicle at gunpoint. There was no legal basis to justify the officer's initial detention by gunpoint as the defendant only drove a short distance, did not speed up upon seeing the police lights, and there was no evidence he was trying to flee.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

Jun 25, 2019 Case: 18-028803MU10A Judge Pole

Facts:

Police stopped the defendant after an anonymous caller stated that the defendant had struck a guardrail and was driving recklessly. Prior to the stop, the officers also spotted the defendant driving into oncoming traffic. The defendant had glassy eyes, constricted pupils, and rambled when he spoke. Believing he was impaired by drugs, as there was no odor of alcohol, he was asked to perform roadside tasks. He performed very poorly and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath and urine test.

Defense:

Prior to trial, the firm filed a motion for statement of particulars. Were were requesting that the prosecutor advise us by what chemical and/or controlled substance was allegedly impairing the defendant. Under Florida law, to convict one of DUI drugs, the State must specify by which "specific" chemical and/or controlled substance the defendant is impaired by. Here, they could not and the State Dropped the DUI and the defendant recieved no conviction on his record.

Result:

The State dropped the DUI.

3412 results found. Viewing page 11 of 35. Go to page 1 2 3 . . . 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 . . . 34 35 Next

Obtain Immediate Legal Help

To save your license, you must act within 10 days. Get in touch with our firm by calling 239.217.3723, or fill out the form here.

Get in Touch Now