DUI Wins

Mar 22, 2023	Case: 22-CT-055110	Judge Silverman
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving under the speed limit, intermittently pressing his brakes, and swerving across the double yellow lines. The officer noticed an odor alcohol, glassy eyes, and slurred speech. He swayed while he stood and had fumbled dexterity. When asked for his driver's license, he gave a debit card. The defendant stated he had drank 4 beers. After performing field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test.
Defense:	After several conversations with the prosecutor about the evidence and the defendant himself, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Mar 22, 2023	Case: 22-CT-049517	Judge Silverman
Facts:	A store clerk had called the police regarding and intoxicated person seated inside of a double parked car. Police had received a call earlier about the same car driving recklessly and almost crashing into a ditch. When officers arrived, they observed the car double parked. The defendant was awoken and the officer noticed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and slurred/mumbled speech. She also had changing emotions. She performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .167 and .167 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The State could not prove she was in actual physical control. They could not prove she had the "capability" to operate the car as she was not only sleeping, but the keys were in her purse. The State Dropped the DUI and she received No Conviction on her record.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Mar 17, 2023	Case: 21-003075MU10A	Judge Francois
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding as well as making a right turn on a red light without stopping. In the police reports, the officer indicated that he observed a series of DUI observations including a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes as well as slurred speech. Several officers stated that the defendant began threatening to kill law enforcement and exhibited extremely violent behavior. The defendant was subsequently placed in cuffs and arrested for DUI. He later refused to submit to a breath test.
Defense:	The video was clearly much different from the reports. Specifically, the police body worn camera shows four different officers pulling the defendant over at gunpoint. They immediately cuffed him. Parks and Braxton filed a motion to suppress based on the fact that the officers violated the defendant's constitutional rights by pulling him over at gunpoint for a traffic infraction. The state conceded the merits of the motion and subsequently dropped the DUI. The defendant received no conviction on his record.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Mar 15, 2023	Case: 22-CT-003855	Judge Dekleva
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for almost causing a head on collision and straddling lane markers. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol and a strong odor of marijuana. He also had bloodshot/glassy eyes, slow movements, and he stated he had consumed two drinks. He then performed various roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He then blew a .151 and .141 in the breath machine.
Defense:	After several conversations with the State, they Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Mar 15, 2023	Case: 22-CF-011292	Judge Kiser
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving all over the road. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/watery eyes, and a wristband form a club. He then performed various field sobriety tests such as HGN (eye test), one leg stand, and the walk and turn. He was then arrested for DUI. He later blew a .091 and .084 in the breath machine. In addition, in a search incident to arrest, officers found cocaine and he was also charged with Possession of Cocaine.
Defense:	The firm pointed out to the State that due to the .02 margin of error, both breath test results could have been under the legal limit. The State agreed and Dropped the DUI. In addition, the defendant received no conviction or penalties on the Felony Possession charge.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Mar 13, 2023	Case: 22-CT-052380	Judge Garagozlo
Facts:	The defendant was on his way to attempt to help a female friend involved in an active domestic violence situation. He was on his way to help her get away from the aggressor (her boyfriend). For some unknown reason, police stopped the defendant at gunpoint because they thought he was the aggressor in the domestic dispute. They conducted a felony stop. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, red/glassy eyes, and mumbled/slurred speech. A bottle of tequila was also found. The defendant refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton pulled the police reports from the separate domestic violence case. We then got them over to the prosecutor to show our client was not the aggressor in the domestic and never should have been stopped at all, nonetheless at gunpoint. The State agreed and Dismissed the DUI.
Result:	The DUI was dismissed.

Mar 8, 2023	Case: 22-CT-046295	Judge Jacobus
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for bouncing from the center lane to the fog line and her speeds were varying. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol and watery eyes. She then performed the HGN (eye test), began the walk and turn, and then stopped. She refused to finish the exercise, nor do any further tests. She was then arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test.
Defense:	Issues were raised by the firm as to a lack of probable cause to arrest.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Mar 8, 2023	Case: 22-CT-052327	Judge Garagozlo
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. Officers observed blood shot eyes, unable to maintain balance, and mumbling/slurred speech. Her movements were slow and she swayed while she stood. There was no odor of alcohol. Believing she was impaired by drugs, she was then asked to perform various field sobriety tests to which she complied. She was then arrested for DUI and later refused both breath and urine tests.
Defense:	Under Florida law, to prove a DUI under Florida Statute 316.193, a person must be under the influence of either alcohol, and/or a chemical substance as specified in chapter 877 of the Florida Statutes, and/or a controlled substance as specified in chapter 893 of the Florida Statutes. Here, there was no odor of alcohol, no alcohol found, no statements about drinking, and no breath test. In addition, there were no drugs found, no urine test, nor did the defendant admit to taking any drugs. A person cannot be convicted of DUI simply because one appears impaired by "something." It must be one or a combination of the above in 316.193. After speaking with prosecutor and pointing out the issue, the State agreed that they could not prove the case and Dismissed the DUI.
Result:	The DUI was dismissed.

Mar 8, 2023	Case: 22-CT-052308	Judge Garagozlo
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding and crossing over the dotted lines. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol and burnt marijuana, red/glassy eyes, she appeared unsteady, and admitted to having consumed 3 alcoholic beverages and to smoking pot. She performed poorly on roadside tests. For example, she was asked to count backwards from 69 to 42 and she counted back to zero. She was arrested for DUI and later refused both breath and urine tests.
Defense:	After several conversations with the State about the evidence and the defendant herself, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Mar 8, 2023	Case: 22-CT-047985	Judge Jacobus
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. Upon contact, the officer observed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, a clumsy dexterity, and unprompted agitation. The defendant denied having anything to drink. He then performed various field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .155 and .151 in the breath machine.
Defense:	After negotiations with the State regarding the evidence, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Mar 7, 2023	Case: 22-007592MU10A	Judge Levy
Facts:	The defendant was attempting to leave a parking lot and subsequently struck two vehicles. The crash was witnessed by three officers who were working a detail at a bar. The officers ran towards the defendant and noticed that she was attempting to leave the scene. They immediately stopped the vehicle and made contact with the driver. The lead investigator asked her why she was attempting to leave the scene of a crash. The driver stated that she was not involved in an accident. The officers all observed an extremely strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes as well as slurred speech. They asked the defendant to exit the vehicle, but she was unable to stand on her own and was placed back into the car. One of the officers located the owners of the two vehicles that were struck in the accident and brought them to the crash scene. In court, one of the owners stated that the defendant was extremely uncooperative and could not stand on her own. The defendant was eventually asked to perform field sobriety tests to which she refused. She stated that she was not in an accident and not "drunk." She was subsequently asked to provide a breath test and was arrested for DUI. The defendant blew a .168 at the police station and subsequently refused to provide a second sample of her breath.
Defense:	In order to request a breath test a person must first be placed under lawful arrest for DUI. In this case, Parks & Braxton filed a motion to exclude the breath test and subsequent refusal based on the fact that the request for a breath test was made before the arrest for DUI. In court the officer testified that while his initial request for a breath sample was prior to arrest, he stated that he asked for a breath test again after the defendant was placed under arrest. On cross-examination the officer admitted that he did not actually request a breath test a second time after arrest. Rather, the officer admitted that the defendant stated in the car that she was willing to do whatever it took to go home. He then testified that he drove her straight to the police station to acquire a sample of her breath. Parks & Braxton successfully argued that by his actions the officer led the defendant to believe that she would go home if she provided a breath test. In addition, the officer failed to read Miranda warnings during the initial stages of the investigation. The Court granted the motion to suppress and excluded any evidence regarding a breath test, a refusal to submit to testing as well as any and all statements made by the defendant. The State Attorney dismissed the case.
Result:	The DUI was dismissed.

Mar 2, 2023	Case: AG5PV5E	Judge Komninos
Facts:	The police were called to a parking garage as the defendant and his passengers were causing a disturbance. Officers noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, droopy eyelids, and mumbled speech. He had mood changes and swayed while he stood. After performing several roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI and later blew a .087 and .081 in the breath machine.
Defense:	Issues were raised about the lawfulness of the initial detaining of the defendant. Also, due to the .02 margin of error in the breath machine, the firm was able to place both breath samples below the legal limit of .08.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Mar 2, 2023	Case: AG5PUFE	Judge Komninos
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding, making sudden lane changes, and driving in an overall aggressive manner. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy/bloodshot eyes, and he swayed while he stood. He then performed various roadside tests such as the estimation 30 seconds (Romberg balance), one leg stand, and walk and turn. He was subsequently arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test.
Defense:	Many observations on the field sobriety tests were contradicted by the videotape.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Mar 2, 2023	Case: AG5PT3E	Judge Komninos
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed a strong odor of marijuana, his mouth was extremely dry, and he had noticeable body tremors. He had mumbled speech, swayed, and had vomit on himself. He then performed field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a urine test.
Defense:	The defendant's performance on the field sobriety tests was contradicted by the police reports.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Mar 2, 2023	Case: AG5PXVE	Judge Komninos
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding, weaving, and failing to move over for an emergency vehicle. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, red/puffy eyes, and he was wearing three different bar wristbands. He appeared unsteady and denied having anything to drink. He performed various roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .101 and .099 in the breath machine.
Defense:	Due to the .02 margin of error the breath machine, the firm was able to place one of the defendant's breath test results under the legal limit of .08.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 28, 2023	Case: 22-CT-501432	Judge Gill
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and his coordination was slow. The car smelled like an alcoholic beverage had spilled. He refused to perform roadside tasks and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test.
Defense:	Based on the video tape evidence as pointed out to the prosecutor, it appeared that none of defendant's normal faculties were impaired. Thus, there was a lack of probable cause to arrest him for DUI. The State Dropped the DUI just before trial.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 28, 2023	Case: 22-CT-010438	Judge Gutman
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving with no headlights. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and a blank/dazed stare. He also had slurred speech, a lethargic appearance, and poor balance. He performed various field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew .177 and .158 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The defendant performed very well on the roadside tests on video tape. This clearly showed that the defendant was absorbing alcohol when he blew into the machine and his breath alcohol content was lower at the time of driving. After several conversations with the State, they Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 28, 2023	Case: 22-CT-014293	Judge Rich
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for running a stop sign. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, he admitted to having drank 5 beers, and had droopy eyelids. His speech was slurred and he appeared unsteady. He then performed field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .198 and .197 in the breath machine.
Defense:	After several conversations with the State regarding the defendant and the evidence, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 28, 2023	Case: 22-CT-006654	Judge Gutman
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving with no lights at night. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and he was lethargic in his movements. He had a wristband on from a nightclub. According to the officer's reports, he performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test.
Defense:	The officer's reports were contradicted by the videotape as to his performance on the roadside tests and all the other written observations. The State agreed and Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 28, 2023	Case: 22-CT-501419	Judge Gill
Facts:	The defendant was stopped after an officer observed him exiting a parking lot without stopping before crossing the sidewalk. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, watery/bloodshot eyes and slurred speech. The officer observed the defendant sway and stumble to catch his balance. According to the officer, he performed poorly on roadside tests such as the walk and turn and one legs stand. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	There was no video in the case. The officer’s reports were vague and without specific details describing the defendant's performance on the roadside tests. Just before trial, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.