DUI Wins

Feb 28, 2023	Case: A9CCOLE	Judge Lawhorne
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and poor dexterity. The defendant stated he had consumed a couple of White Claws and also had a wristband form a club. He then performed various roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .173 and .165 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The officer misled the defendant into taking a breath test. The officer told the defendant that he could get a hardship permit if he blew, but none if he refused. That is a misstatement of the law as one can obtain a hardship if they refuse the breath test as well. The officer went beyond the realm of the implied consent law and coerced the defendant into taking a breath test. Knowing that the breath test would be excluded from evidence, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 28, 2023	Case: 22-CT-008745	Judge Gutman
Facts:	The defendant crashed her car by driving through barricades and then crashing into a center median. When officers arrived, they noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and she appeared unsteady on her feet. She refused to perform any field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused a breath test.
Defense:	Between the video and written reports, there was a lack of probable cause to arrest her for DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 27, 2023	Case: 22-CT-501996	Judge Gill
Facts:	The defendant was stopped after an officer observed him leave the left lane and strike a curb. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and thick tongued speech. The defendant stated that he had consumed a few drinks and he also had a wristband on from a bar. He performed various roadside tests such as HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand. He was then arrested for DUI and later blew a .133 and .130 in the breath machine. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
Defense:	The firm filed a motion to suppress the lawfulness of the traffic stop. In our motion, we alleged there was no probable cause or reasonable suspicion of a crime to stop the defendant based on him hitting a curb one time. There could have been 100 innocent explanations such as looking at your phone or playing with the radio for a split second. The State Agreed and Dismissed the defendant's Second DUI.
Result:	The DUI was dismissed.

Feb 22, 2023	Case: 22-CT-004410	Judge Taylor
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for traveling southbound in the northbound lane. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. His pupils were dilated and he had a noticeable sway while standing. He performed various roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	On tape, the defendant's speech was not slurred and he did not sway. Based on conflicts in the evidence, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 22, 2023	Case: 22-CT-009278	Judge Denkin
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding and weaving. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and a "vacant" stare. His eyes were glossy, he leaned on the trunk for balance, and he denied having anything to drink. He performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	After several discussions with the State about the evidence and the defendant, the State agreed to Drop the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 22, 2023	Case: 22-CT-011337	Judge Taylor
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving without his headlights illuminated. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol and requested the defendant to perform roadside tests. After performing the field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He subsequently refused a breath test.
Defense:	An odor alone is legally insufficient to provide reasonable suspicion of DUI to request roadside tests. The State, realizing they would lose all the field sobriety tests in evidence, Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 21, 2023	Case: 22-CT-002273	Judge Conrad
Facts:	The defendant crashed his car into a ditch and collided with a tree line. A civilian witnessed the crash and ran over to help. When the first officer arrived, he noticed an odor of alcohol and vomit on the defendant's shirt. The defendant was then transported to the hospital where another officer met him there. At the hospital, that officer noticed slurred/thick tongued speech and the defendant appeared very confused about the crash. He did not smell any alcohol. A medical blood draw was done which later showed a .252 blood alcohol result (over three times the legal limit).
Defense:	Parks & Braxton took pretrial depositions of the two officers and the civilian. Due to conflicting sworn statements between the three witnesses, issues were raised by the firm about the lawfulness of the investigation leading up the blood draw.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 21, 2023	Case: 22-CT-013523	Judge Conrad
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving northbound in the southbound lane and crossing over the double yellow line. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, a blank/dazed look, and slurred speech. He also appeared disoriented and had lethargic movements. The defendant only agreed to perform the HGN (eye test) and then refused to perform the rest of the field sobriety tests. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test.
Defense:	After conversations with the State regarding conflicts between the videotape and the written reports, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 21, 2023	Case: 22-CT-012067	Judge Conrad
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving without any headlights illuminated. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and she appeared unsteady. She then performed various field sobriety tests such as the walk and turn and one leg stand. She was arrested for DUI and later blew a .113 and .109 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The defendant's video tape clearly showed she may have been under the legal limit at the time of driving.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 21, 2023	Case: 22-CT-014632	Judge Panse
Facts:	Police responded to a call about a drunk driver. The defendant was found in the driver's seat and parked at a gate of a community. When the defendant rolled down her window, the officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant was unsteady and had an orbital sway while outside the car. Her movements were also clumsy and uncoordinated. After performing poorly on roadside tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later refused a breath test.
Defense:	The lawfulness of the initial encounter with police was called into question. The officer had no corroboration of any DUI observations or driving pattern when he ordered her to roll down her window. It wasn't until her window was down that the officer started making all the DUI observations.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 14, 2023	Case: 21-014690MU10A	Judge Brown
Facts:	The defendant was involved in a crash with extensive damage. The initial officer on scene observed a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot watery eyes as well as slurred speech. In addition, he testified that the defendant was extremely unsteady on her feet and was unable to locate her license and registration. Subsequently, a DUI task force officer arrived on scene to conduct an investigation. The DUI task force officer made similar observations. However, the defendant explained that she is fully functional, but suffers from autism. In addition, the defendant discussed the medications she takes. She subsequently refused both field sobriety tests as well as a breath test and was arrested for DUI.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton took testimony from both officers. While their observations were fairly consistent, neither of the officers were able to fully detail the extent that the autism and the medications she took played in the investigation. Specifically, while she displayed some signs of impairment, the officers were unable to discount the possibility that the observations were equally consistent with the medication she consumed as opposed to alcohol consumption. On the morning of the trial the State dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 14, 2023	Case: 22-CT-004782	Judge Gutman
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for drifting back and forth and crossing over the laner markers. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, a blank/dazed look, and slow movements. She had slurred speech, poor coordination, and admitted to having consumed 2 alcoholic beverages. She then performed various field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. She subsequently refused to take a breath test.
Defense:	Many observations on the video contradicted the police reports. Her speech was not slurred, she did not appear to be moving slow, and she seemed responsive and coherent. The State Dropped the DUI after negotiations.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 14, 2023	Case: 22-CT-004848	Judge Gutman
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, mildly slurred speech, and she appeared unsteady. Her face was flushed and her eyes were bloodshot. The defendant had a wristband on from a club. After performing various roadside tests such as the walk and turn, HGN (eye test), and one leg stand, she was arrested for DUI. She later refused a breath test.
Defense:	After several discussions with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 8, 2023	Case: 22-CT-015220	Judge Moses-Stephens
Facts:	A concerned citizen called police that the defendant appeared drunk and was in no condition to drive. He also tried to stop the defendant from driving. The officer located the defendant and stopped the car. He observed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and a flushed/red face. He also had droopy eyelids and slurred speech. He then performed various field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .093 and .090 in the breath machine.
Defense:	When an anonymous tip is called in, the police must observe some corroboration such as erratic driving to legally stop the car. Here, there was no corroboration at all. Thus, the traffic stop was unlawful. The State then Dropped the DUI and the defendant received no criminal conviction.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 8, 2023	Case: 22-CT-002789	Judge Dekleva
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving the wrong way into oncoming traffic. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, sluggish body movements, and thick tongued speech. She also had bloodshot eyes and appeared disheveled. She performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .187 and .182 in the breath machine.
Defense:	After conversations with the prosecutor about the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 3, 2023	Case: AGOW2XE	Judge Komninos
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding after being seen leaving a gentleman's club. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, a blank/dazed look, and his speech was slurred. He also had bloodshot eyes and starting demonstrating hand striking fighting motions to the officer for no reason. The defendant stated that he had consumed vodka with Red Bull. He performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test
Defense:	After numerous discussions with the State about the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 3, 2023	Case: AG5PURE	Judge Komninos
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for running a red light. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and she stated that she had a few drinks. After performing various roadside tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later refused a breath test.
Defense:	Many observations written in the reports detailing her performance on the roadside tests were contradicted by the DUI video tape.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 3, 2023	Case: AGE3LKE	Judge Komninos
Facts:	Police were called to the scene of a disturbance where there was a physical fight in which the defendant was involved. The defendant was seen leaving and was stopped by police. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. He also was uneasy on his feet. The defendant then performed various field sobriety tests such as the finger to nose, one leg stand, and walk and turn. He was then arrested for DUI.
Defense:	After several conversations with the State about the defendant and the evidence, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 3, 2023	Case: AG5PTTE	Judge Komninos
Facts:	The defendant was seen by an officer propping up his motorcycle after he had fallen. The officer went up to the defendant and noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and an unsteady gait. The defendant stated he had drank two beers. The officer told the defendant, "don't drive and take an uber or taxi" and you won't be arrested for DUI. About 30 minutes later, the officer spotted the defendant on his bike and moving it. At that time, the officer once again stopped the defendant and began a DUI investigation. The defendant refused to perform field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test.
Defense:	Under Florida law, an officer must advise a defendant of the adverse consequences if they refuse to do roadside tests or the refusal will excluded from evidence. Here, the officer did not give any consequences.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 3, 2023	Case: A6SA5VE	Judge Komninos
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving and speeding. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred/thick tongued speech, and watery eyes. He appeared unsteady and swayed while outside his truck. The defendant performed only the HGN (eye test) and refused to perform any further roadside tests. He was arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test.
Defense:	Under Florida law, when a defendant refuses to perform roadside tests, they must be warned of adverse consequences by the officer for their refusal or the refusal will be excluded from evidence. Here, the defendant was not given any consequences.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.