Results

May 24, 2021	Case: 20-CT-016247	Judge Panse
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding, weaving, and cutting all over lanes of traffic. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, a flushed red face, and slurred speech. The defendant appeared nonresponsive to the officer’s questions. After performing roadside tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI arrest.
Defense:	The firm pointed out to the State that on tape the officer had his mind made up to arrest the defendant prior to any DUI investigation being conducted. He was talking very fast and the defendant couldn't follow what he was saying. It was very clear that he was just going though the motions.
Result:	The State Dropped the defendant's Second DUI.

May 20, 2021	Case: ABW48OE	Judge Szematowicz
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/watery eyes, and a dazed look. Her speech was mumbled, she swayed while she stood, and she fumbled with her documents. After performing various field sobriety tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later blew. a .103 and a .098 in the breath machine.
Defense:	Due to the .02 margin of error in the breath machine, the firm was able to place one of the defendant's breath results under the legal limit. In addition, when the officer performed the HGN (eye test) on the defendant, he did not get an angle of onset prior to 45 degrees. What that means is that the defendant could have been under the legal limit at the time of driving pursuant to Tharpe's formula. Also, many observations the officer wrote were contradicted by the video tape.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

May 18, 2021	Case: 21-CT-001454	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for being stopped in a lane of traffic asleep at the wheel. Officers noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He also was unsteady and admitted to having drank alcohol. He then performed roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew. a 133 and a .126 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The initial seizure by police was unlawful when they ordered him out of the car because they made no DUI observations while he was still seated in the car.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

May 18, 2021	Case: 20-CT-008692	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was stopped after he almost collided with a police car. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he appeared sleepy. They also noticed slow/deliberate movements, watery eyes, and a dazed/blank stare. After performing various field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Third DUI arrest.
Defense:	Many observations the officer wrote in his reports were contradicted by the video tape.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

May 12, 2021	Case: 20-CT-011107	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving the wrong way and swerving. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and slurred speech. He was asked to perform roadside tests to which he refused. He was then arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
Defense:	The credibility of the officers was called into question as to whether or not the defendant actually had an odor of alcohol. One officer can he heard on tape saying he did not smell anything even as he was up close. Also, the defendant's speech did not appear slurred on tape.
Result:	The State Dropped the Defendant's Second DUI.

May 7, 2021	Case: 20-004566MU10A1	Judge Szematowicz
Facts:	The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash. Officers observed an odor of alcohol and bloodshot/watery eyes, After performing various field sobriety tests such as the walk and turn and one leg stand, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	On tape, it was clear the arresting officer was being trained by a field training officer. At one point on tape, after all the roadside tests were completed by the trainee, the trainee was overheard saying to his superior, "I am not sure." The arresting officer can be heard, "use your training and experience. " Well, he has none.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

May 6, 2021	Case: 20-004566MU10A	Judge Solomon
Facts:	The defendant was the at fault driver in a crash and then fled the scene. When officers caught the defendant, they observed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and he had a hard time keeping his eyes open. He appeared very unsteady, used the car door for support, and had a dazed look. The defendant refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI and leaving the scene of an accident. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The firm filed a pretrial motion to suppress any and all of the defendant's statements to police based on a violation of Miranda. On the day of the motion, the State agreed to Drop the DUI. He also received no conviction on the leaving the scene of an accident charge.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

May 6, 2021	Case: 20-CT-016822	Judge Eissey
Facts:	The defendant crashed his car into another car after backing out of a driveway. Officers observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slightly slurred speech, and he admitted to having drank beer. He was unsteady and had trouble focusing. He kept repeating the same story over and over. After performing field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .123 and a .127 in the breath machine.
Defense:	legal issues were raised by the firm about whether the defendant was coerced into taking a breath test.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

May 5, 2021	Case: 20-CT-008124	Judge Gutman
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and he used his truck for balance. After performing only the HGN (eye test) , he refused to perform any others. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton raised issues as to a lack of probable cause to make the arrest based on the video tape evidence.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

May 5, 2021	Case: 20-CT-011110	Judge Gutman
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding and crossing over lane markers. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/glassy eyes, and a flushed face. He admitted to having drank beer. He was also unsteady and he swayed while standing. After performing roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .156 and a .145 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The firm raised various contradictions in the reports versus the video tape.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 27, 2021	Case: 20-CT-012321	Judge Conrad
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving the wrong way down a one way street. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, watery/bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton raised issues as to the lawfulness of the arrest due to a lack of probable cause.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 20, 2021	Case: 20-CT-012002	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was found passed out in the driver's seat of his car in the middle of an intersection. Upon awakening the defendant, officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and watery/glassy eyes. He also had displaced motor skills and was unsteady. After performing roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .197 and a .188 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The firm brought contradictions between the reports and the video to the State's attention.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 14, 2021	Case: 20-CT-054364	Judge Jacobus
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for failing to yield to an oncoming vehicle and almost causing a crash. Officers noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, mumbling speech, and watery eyes. His movements were slow, he stumbled, and he also swayed. After performing field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .149 and a .142 in the breath machine.
Defense:	There were issues as to whether the defendant actually failed to yield calling into question the lawfulness of the traffic stop.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 14, 2021	Case: 20-CT-051685	Judge Garagozlo
Facts:	The defendant was found by police asleep behind the wheel of his car. He was slumped over the wheel. When they awoke him, they noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and his movements were slow. After performing poorly on roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The defendant was not in actual physical control as he had no capability to operate the vehicle while he was sleeping.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 14, 2021	Case: 20-CT-012631	Judge Conrad
Facts:	The defendant crashed his car off an embankment. When officers arrived, they observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. He made inconsistent statements and appeared confused. He admitted to drinking and performed poorly on roadside tests. He was arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	There were issues as to whether the State could prove that the defendant was in actual physical control because he was not behind the wheel when officers arrived on scene.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 14, 2021	Case: 20-CT-048275	Judge Garagozlo
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving with no headlights. Officers noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he appeared clumsy. He was asked to perform roadside tests to which he refused. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The defendant was never advised of any adverse consequences when he refused to perform field sobriety tests as required by law.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 14, 2021	Case: 21-CT-010118	Judge Garagozlo
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for failing to maintain a single lane. Once stopped, officers noticed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and a flushed face. He admitted to having drank two beers and he swayed. After performing field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He alter refused the breath test.
Defense:	Issues were raised by the firm as to the lawfulness of the traffic stop based on the video and the reports.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 13, 2021	Case: 5521-XEB	Judge Lawhorne
Facts:	The defendant backed into a car and fled the scene. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glassy eyes. He was unsteady, swayed, and staggered. After performing poorly on the roadside tests he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. He was also charged with leaving he scene of an accident.
Defense:	During discovery, the defense learned that the officer used some type of hand held video camera. It was discovered that the video was destroyed. Prior to filing any motions to dismiss for destruction of evidence, the State Dropped the DUI and also the Leaving the Scene charge.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 13, 2021	Case: AD0BYCE	Judge Lawhorne
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. Officers observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he appeared lethargic. After performing roadside tests such as the walk and turn and one leg stand, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
Defense:	There was a lack of probable cause to arrest the defendant based on the video tape and police report evidence. This was presented to the prosecutor.
Result:	The State Dropped the defendant's Second DUI.

Apr 12, 2021	Case: 19-CT-002446	Judge Bigney
Facts:	The defendant was found passed out in his car in a lane of travel. The officer parked his car in front of the defendant's car so it wouldn't move forward. Officers noticed the defendant to be nonresponsive to their questions, have an odor of alcohol, and have bloodshot eyes. He was then asked to perform roadside tests and he refused. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Third DUI arrest.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton got the defendant's refusal to perform roadside tests excluded because the officer did not advise him of any adverse consequences as required by law. We also pointed out to the Sate without that evidence of the refusal, there was a lack of probable cause to arrest him.
Result:	The day before the trial, the State Dismissed the defendant's Third DUI.

←73 / 196→

Obtain Immediate Legal Help

To save your license, you must take action within 10 days. Contact a partner about your case today by calling (645) 400-6504 or fill out the form here.

Contact Us Today