DUI Wins

Aug 25, 2020	Case: 19-CT-016737	Judge Jeske
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving with a defective tag light. The defendant had an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He had difficulty opening the car door, difficulty understanding instructions, and his dexterity was poor. He refused to do roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI arrest.
Defense:	Almost every observation that the officer wrote in his reports was contradicted by the video tape. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 19, 2020	Case: 19-CT-019539	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving with no lights. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and he had stated he had drank wine. The defendant agreed to perform the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand exercises. He did not perform to satisfaction and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .183 and a .177 in the breath machine.
Defense:	Under the theory of absorption and elimination of alcohol, the video showed that the defendant may have been under the legal limit at the time of driving. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 19, 2020	Case: 20-CT-002553	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving and speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, watery/glassy eyes, and he admitted to having drank 5 beers. After performing the field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew. a .194 and a .190 in the breath machine.
Defense:	While conducting the HGN (eye test), one cue that the officer is looking for is to see if the defendant's eyes jerk (called nystagmus) prior to 45 degrees. Under Tharpes formula, if the officer doesn't see an angle of onset prior to 45 degrees, this could indicate the defendant was under the legal limit. Here, the officer never observed an angle prior to 45 degrees leading one to believe he may have been under the legal limit at the time of driving. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 19, 2020	Case: 19-CT-017861	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was involved in a traffic crash. It was determined by police he was not the at fault driver. Officers observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he fumbled with his documents. He stated he had drank beer. He performed roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew. a .167 and a .158 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The defendant's performance on the field sobriety tests on video contradicted what the officer wrote in the reports. In addition, it was clear from his video that his breath alcohol level was lower at the time of driving. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 19, 2020	Case: 19-CT-012687	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he swayed while he stood. According to the officer, he failed the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The firm was able to show many contradictions between the written police reports and video tape. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 19, 2020	Case: 19-CT-015940	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving with no lights and speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and a flushed face. Her movements were clumsy and slow, and she had a confused look on her face. After performing roadside tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .089 and a .089 in the breath machine.
Defense:	There is a .02 margin of error in the breath machine. Thus, the firm was able to place the defendant 's breath alcohol level under the legal limit at the time of driving.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 11, 2020	Case: 19-CT-014103	Judge Jeske
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and unstable balance. The defendant stated he had drank beer. He performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .195 and a .189 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The firm was able to demonstrate, that based on various issues on the video, there was a lack of probable cause to make the arrest. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 11, 2020	Case: 20-CT-000306	Judge Conrad
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving with no headlights. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and red eyes. She was also unsteady on her feet. She was arrested for DUI after performing several filed sobriety tests. She later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The defendant had several medical issues which could have affected her balance and performance on the walk and turn and one leg stand. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 11, 2020	Case: 19-CT-016315	Judge Conrad
Facts:	The defendant was stopped trying to drive to a checkpoint at the Port. He was detained for police. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He had difficulty standing and almost fell. He couldn't even perform some of the roadsides due to his level of intoxication. He was arrested for DUI and later blew a .198 and a .190 in the breath machine.
Defense:	There was no reasonable suspicion of a crime justifying the defendant's detainment by civilian port employees. In legal terms, it was an unlawful citizen's arrest by detaining him until police arrived. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 11, 2020	Case: 19-CT-016301	Judge Conrad
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for running a stop sign. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and unsteadiness. The defendant then performed the walk and turn, one leg stand, and HGN (eye test). He was then arrested for DUI and later blew a .162 and a .157 in the breath machine.
Defense:	There was some confusion on the defendant 's behalf as to whether to take the breath test. There was some conversation back and forth with the officer which left the defendant believing he had no choice but to blow.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 6, 2020	Case: 19-CT-018267	Judge Jeske
Facts:	A civilian called 911 stating that the defendant was driving all over the road. When police found the defendant, he was standing outside his car at a gas station. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, unstable balance, and slurred speech. He stated he had drank 3 to 4 beers. He performed poorly on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .216 and a .204 in the breath machine.
Defense:	Under Florida Statue 901.15, when there is no crash, an officer must observe every element of the crime of DUI, including seeing the defendant either driving or in actual physical control. Otherwise, the arrest is unlawful. Here, the arrest was unlawful because no officer saw the defendant driving or behind the wheel. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 5, 2020	Case: 2020-CT-014428	Judge Babb
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving with no lights and weaving. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glassy eyes. She also admitted to having consumed a couple of drinks. She swayed and appeared unsteady. After performing the roadside tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later blew. a .162 and a .162 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The reports contradicted the video as to numerous specifics on the field sobriety tests. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 5, 2020	Case: 20-CT-002585	Judge Gutman
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving the wrong way down a one way street. The officer observed an odor of alcohol and his eyes were bloodshot. He then performed roadside tests such has the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	There must be reasonable suspicion of a crime to request field sobriety tests. In other words, the officer must observe some indication of impairment. Here, there was no erratic driving and the bloodshot eyes and odor of alcohol are indicators of consumption of alcohol, not impairment. Thus, the State was at risk of having all the roadsides excluded from evidence. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 30, 2020	Case: 19-CT-057709	Judge Peacock
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding and weaving. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. His movements were slow, he was clumsy, and he swayed. After performing filed sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .20 and a .199 in the breath machine.
Defense:	Due to contradictions in the reports versus the video, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 29, 2020	Case: 19-CT-019541	Judge Gutman
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding and weaving. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he swayed while he stood. He performed the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .129 and a .126 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The video contradicted the officer's reports as to the level of impairment. The defendant's performance on the field sobriety tests also showed that the defendant's breath alcohol level has to have been lower at the time of driving under the theory of absorption and elimination of alcohol. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 29, 2020	Case: 19-CT-018436	Judge Gutman
Facts:	The defendant was found passed out his car. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and watery/glassy eyes. The defendant agreed to perform the walk and turn, one leg stand, and finger to nose exercises. He failed them and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .136 and a .130 in the breath machine. This was the defendant's Third DUI arrest.
Defense:	Prior to trial, the firm pointed out issues as to the lawfulness of the initial contact and ordering him out of the car. We put forth that the officers didn't have the requisite reasonable suspicion of crime to justify ordering him to step out. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 29, 2020	Case: 20-CT-002203	Judge Gutman
Facts:	The defendant was involved in a crash in a parking garage. The officer observed an odor of alcohol and bloodshot eyes. The defendant agreed only to perform the HGN (eye test). He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The firm pointed out to the State that while performing the HGN (eye test) the defendant stated he had eye damage, yet the officer still continued to check his eyes. The officer didn't even clarify what type of injury it was that could affect the nsytagmus in his eyes. Thus, the officer's credibility was called into question and the State dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 29, 2020	Case: 20-CT-001817	Judge Gutman
Facts:	The defendant was found passed out in her car in a parking lot. The officers also observed alcohol in the car. It took numerous attempts to get the defendant to respond and wake up. Upon awakening the defendant, they observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and she had to use the car to maintain her balance. She performed poorly on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .178 and a .159 in the breath machine.
Defense:	In order to prove that the defendant was in actual physical control, the of State must prove that the defendant had the capability of operating the vehicle. Here, they could not because one cannot operate the vehicle while sleeping. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 28, 2020	Case: 19-CT-010248	Judge Panse
Facts:	The defendant was in involved in a single vehicle motorcycle accident whereby he crashed and flipped the bike over. The defendant had already been transported the hospital when police arrived at the scene of the crash. Upon going to the hospital to make contact with the defendant, the officers observed an odor of alcohol. The officer then requested the defendant provide a blood sample. The blood alcohol results from the FDLE lab were a .239 and a .240. The defendant was then charged with DUI.
Defense:	Under Florida law, there must be more than a mere odor of alcohol to request blood. Here, the blood was drawn illegally without the requisite observations by the officer. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.