DUI Wins

Jan 12, 2026	Case: 25-CT-044858	Judge Koenig
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving all over the road. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, and he stated that he had consumed two drinks. The defendant also stumbled and swayed. The defendant performed the roadside tests, which consisted of the HGN (eye test), one leg stand, and walk and turn exercises. He was arrested for DUI and later blew a .128 and .114 in the breath machine.
Defense:	After negotiations with the prosecutor regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 7, 2026	Case: 25-CT-502820	Judge Mirra
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for honking his horn multiple times without any apparent reason and making an illegal U-turn. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, open containers of alcohol in the center console, bloodshot eyes, and he was very insulting and combative. After performing the HGN (eye test), one leg stand, and walk and turn exercises, he was arrested for DUI.
Defense:	On tape, he was only being combative because he felt that he was not impaired and/or intoxicated. His speech was normal and he was not off balance at all. He performed very well on the roadside tests compared to what was written in the reports. Just prior to trial, the State Dropped the DUI and he received no conviction and no penalties other than a fine and court costs.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 7, 2026	Case: 25-CT-502866	Judge Mirra
Facts:	The defendant was found by police sitting in a lane of traffic. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant refused to perform and field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test. This was his Second DUI.
Defense:	The defendant explained to police that he was looking for his dog and that why he had stopped in the road. In addition, the firm filed a motion to exclude his refusal to perform field sobriety tests. When a defendant refuses to perform field sobriety tests, an officer must advise them of the adverse consequences for refusing. For example, the officer must state something like, "I am going to have base my decision to arrest you on what I have observed so far if you refuse." In addition, the officer can state to the defendant that their refusal can be used against them in court. If they do not give any adverse consequences, the refusal will be excluded from evidence. Here, the officer did not give the defendant any adverse consequences. After negotiations short of trial, the State Dropped the DUI and he received no penalties other than court costs and a fine.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 7, 2026	Case: 25-CT-008579	Judge Taylor
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for sitting at a green light, stopping without cause in a traffic lane, and driving well under the speed limit. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/watery eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant stated she had drank two to three cups of whisky. The defendant performed poorly on the roadside tests, which consisted of the HGN (eye test), one leg stand, and walk and turn exercises. She was arrested for DUI and later blew a .177 and .165 in the breath machine.
Defense:	After negotiations with the prosecutor regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 7, 2026	Case: 25-CT-046461	Judge Ingram
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving all over the road and speeding. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, unsteadiness, clumsiness, and slurred/slow speech. The defendant stated that he had drank a couple of beers. He performed poorly on the roadside tests, which consisted of the HGN (eye test), one leg stand, and walk and turn exercises. He was arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test.
Defense:	After negotiations with the prosecutor regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 7, 2026	Case: 25-CT-036369	Judge Ingram
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving with inoperable taillights. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, the defendant fumbled with his documents, and he admitted to having drank a few beers. His dexterity was clumsy and he had a flushed face. Alcohol was also found in the car. The defendant performed the roadside tests, which consisted of the HGN (eye test), one leg stand, and walk and turn exercises. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
Defense:	We pointed out to the State that none of his normal faculties were impaired. There was no driving pattern, his speech was normal, and on tape he was not clumsy. He walked normal and his field sobriety tests were much better on tape than as described in the police reports. The State Dropped his Second DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 6, 2026	Case: 25-CT-014768	Judge Scott
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving back and forth in his lane, riding the fog line, and making an improper U-turn by crossing over a double yellow line. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and slurred speech. He also swayed, was unsteady, and had a red stain on his lips from red wine. The defendant performed the field sobriety tests, which consisted of the HGN (eye test), one leg stand, and walk and turn exercises. He was arrested for DUI and later blew a .159 and .157 in the breath machine.
Defense:	After negotiations with the prosecutor regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 6, 2026	Case: 25-CT-010909	Judge Scott
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding, weaving, and failing to stop at a red light. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he fumbled with his documents. His eyes were bloodshot/glassy and he had difficulty dividing his attention. Officers also found alcohol in the car. He refused to perform any field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI arrest.
Defense:	After negotiations with the prosecutor prior to trial regarding the video evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 6, 2026	Case: 25-CT-014704	Judge Scott
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/glassy eyes, and she denied drinking any alcohol. The defendant performed poorly on the roadside tests, which consisted of the HGN (eye test), one leg stand, and walk and turn exercises. The defendant later blew a. 140 and .137 in the breath machine.
Defense:	After negotiations with the prosecutor regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 5, 2026	Case: 25-CT-048578	Judge Garagozlo
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for running a red light. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, and she appeared confused and disoriented. She fumbled with her documents and there was also an open cardboard package containing alcohol in her passenger seat. The defendant could not formulate coherent sentences and was unable to focus. She performed very poorly on the field sobriety tests. Due to physical injuries, she performed a series of seated field sobriety tests such as the finger to nose, palm pat, hand coordination, and HGN (eye test). She was arrested for DUI and later blew a .156 and .151 in the breath machine.
Defense:	After conversations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 5, 2026	Case: 25-CT-047224	Judge Garagozlo
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving erratically between lanes, narrowly avoiding other cars, and running a red light. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, constricted pupils, a sway, and he stumbled while exiting the car. The defendant performed poorly on the roadside tests, which consisted of the HGN (eye test), one leg stand, and walk and turn exercises. He was arrested for DUI and later attempted to blow in the breath machine but could only provide one invalid sample of a .243 (also called a volume not met (VNM). Since he was not blowing properly, it was deemed a refusal.
Defense:	After negotiations with the prosecutor regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Dec 18, 2025	Case: 25-CT-037334	Judge Ingram
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for running a stop sign. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy/red eyes, and slurred speech. He was also unsteady on his feet. He refused to do any field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI arrest.
Defense:	When a defendant refuses field sobriety tests, the officer must provide adverse consequences. They must say something to the effect of "your refusal can be used against you in court," or "I am going to have to make an arrest decision based on what I see so far." If they do not provide the adverse consequence, otherwise known as Taylor Warnings, the refusal is excluded from evidence. Here, they did not give any. Also, in Florida, a breath test cannot be requested until after one is arrested for DUI. Florida does not have prearrest breath tests or handheld devices. Here, they asked for breath prior the arrest. In fact, on tape, you can hear one cop yelling to the other "don't ask for breath now." The State Dropped the DUI and he received no penalties other than court costs and a fine.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Dec 17, 2025	Case: 25-CT-037406	Judge T. Brown
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding and stopping past the stop bar in the crosswalk. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, he struggled to locate his documents, had glossy eyes and slurred speech. After performing the HGN (eye test), one leg stand, estimation of 30 seconds, the alphabet, and walk and turn exercises, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .130 and .121 in the breath machine.
Defense:	After negotiations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, they Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Dec 17, 2025	Case: 25-CT-042885	Judge T. Brown
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding and drifting all over the road. He was alleged to have driven in the bike lane, onto the grass, and nearly struck a sign. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and his movements were clumsy. The defendant stated that he had consumed one drink. The defendant refused to perform any field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test.
Defense:	After negotiations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, they Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Dec 17, 2025	Case: 25-CT-011469	Judge Taylor
Facts:	The defendant was found passed out in his car, slumped over the wheel, and blocking a lane of travel on the interstate. EMS and officers observed an odor of alcohol. Officers also observed bloodshot eyes and slurred speech. After performing the HGN (eye test), one leg stand, and walk and turn exercises, he was arrested for DUI. The defendant later blew a .160 and .151 in the breath machine.
Defense:	After negotiations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, they Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Dec 17, 2025	Case: 25-CT-011207	Judge Taylor
Facts:	The defendant was stopped after he was observed driving eastbound in the westbound lane. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glassy/watery eyes. The defendant admitted to having consumed at least three beers. After performing the HGN (eye test), one leg stand, and walk and turn exercises, he was arrested for DUI. The defendant later refused a breath test.
Defense:	After conversations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, they Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Dec 17, 2025	Case: 25-CT-011335	Judge Taylor
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for running a stop sign. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, unsteady balance, and red eyes. After performing the HGN (eye test), one leg stand, and walk and turn exercises, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a . 155 and .145 in the breath machine.
Defense:	After negotiations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, they Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Dec 17, 2025	Case: 25-CT-011598	Judge Taylor
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding and weaving back and forth. The officer stated that she had left her lane several times. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, a dazed/blank stare, and slurred speech. The defendant started to do the HGN (eye test), never finished, and was arrested for DUI. She later refused a breath test.
Defense:	The officer alleged in his reports that the defendant refused to do any field sobriety tests. That was not true because on tape he never even asked her to do any field sobriety tests other than HGN (eye test). He got frustrated with her during the HGN (eye test) because she kept moving her head and just arrested her. Also on tape, she never left her lane several times. It was like once. We called into question the credibility of the officer. The State Dropped the DUI and she received no conviction and no penalties other than court costs.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Dec 17, 2025	Case: 25-CT-011448	Judge Taylor
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/watery eyes, and he walked awkwardly. After performing the HGN (eye test), one leg stand, and walk and turn exercises, he was arrested for DUI. The defendant later refused a breath test.
Defense:	After negotiations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, they Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Dec 12, 2025	Case: 24-CF-001418	Judge Roby
Facts:	The defendant ran a stop sign and undercover officers got behind him. They were driving in an unmarked police pickup truck. According to the officers, the defendant sped up and they immediately conducted a PIT (pursuit intervention technique) maneuver by ramming into the back of his car. According to the officers, he did not stop and they conducted another PIT maneuver by ramming his car again. The defendant was ordered out of the car at gunpoint and handcuffed. There were numerous officers on scene with dogs, guns, and shields. It should be noted that the defendant was coming home from dinner with his girlfriend in the car. Once cuffed, they placed him under arrest for Felony Fleeing and Eluding. Officers on scene also noticed an odor of alcohol. While at the police station, a DUI officer was called. That officer alleged that the defendant also had slurred speech and bloodshot eyes. The defendant refused to do any field sobriety tests and they put a DUI charge on him as well. He later refused breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
Defense:	The two officers that stopped the defendant had body worn cameras. From the time they turned on their siren, it was no more than ten seconds, if that, that they were ramming his car doing a PIT maneuver. They didn't even give him a chance to stop. Also on tape, you can see the defendant actually slowing down and not speeding up. Furthermore, they never rammed his car a second time (that was a lie). The firm took pretrial testimony of the officers as well. On tape, his speech was not slurred at all. In fact, he spoke clearly and was pissed because they destroyed his car for no reason. During pretrial talks with the prosecutor, we gave him the pretrial testimony of the officers and we pointed out that this was over zealous undercover drug cops jumping the gun and doing PIT maneuvers too fast. The defendant was not trying to flee and elude. He was coming home from dinner. There was no reason for him to evade the police after simply running a stop sign. They never even gave him a chance to stop on his own . We also pointed out that there was not enough evidence for a DUI charge. Three days before trial, the State not only Dropped the Second DUI, but also reduced the Felony Fleeing and Eluding to a misdemeanor.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.