Results

Mar 10, 2021	Case: 19-CT-001908	Judge Crown
Facts:	The defendant was stopped by police after hotel staff called 911 at the resort where they were staying. The caller stated that the defendant and his girlfriend were causing a disturbance at the pool due to alcohol intoxication and were throwing them out. The officer, prior to stopping the defendant, also observed no working taillights on the car. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he was profusely sweating. He also had glassy eyes and stated he should have been at home sleeping. After refusing to perform roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Third DUI arrest.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton took a pretrial deposition of the arresting officer. At the depo, we were able to gain testimony from the officer that contradicted his reports. In addition, after the depo it was clear the officer did not advise the defendant of any adverse consequences when he refused to perform roadside tests, as required by law.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Mar 5, 2021	Case: 20-CT-011093	Judge Bonavita
Facts:	A citizen called 911 that the defendant was driving erratically in a parking lot and appeared intoxicated. Officers spotted the defendant's car and followed him until conducting a traffic stop. They observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, red eyes, and he appeared off balance. The defendant refused to perform any roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Third DUI.
Defense:	The officers followed the defendant for a long time. There was no erratic driving pattern observed by the officers. The lawfulness of the traffic stop was called into question as there was no corroboration. In addition, the officer did not advise the defendant of any adverse consequences when he refused to perform the field sobriety tests. Also, all the observations alleged in the police report were contradicted by the video.
Result:	The State Dropped the defendant's Third DUI.

Mar 5, 2021	Case: AD0B71E	Judge Szematowicz
Facts:	A caller dialed 911 that the defendant's car lights were off and she appeared drunk. Officers spotted the defendant and stopped her after she proceeded through an intersection. They observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. She also had a flushed face and appeared unsteady. After refusing to perform the field sobriety tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The caller on 911 stated only a conclusory statement that the defendant appeared drunk with no other supporting facts. When there is a only a conclusory statement about the defendant being drunk, the officers must observe some type of erratic driving pattern. The lawfulness of the stop was called into question.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Mar 4, 2021	Case: 20-CT-006699	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was found passed out in a Home Depot parking lot with his head against the horn causing it to go off. Upon awakening the defendant, officers observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and red eyes. He also had lethargic movements. After performing the field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew .202 and .193 in the breath machine.
Defense:	There was no reasonable suspicion to believe the defendant was sick, injured or impaired justifying ordering him out of his car. He could have just as easily been sleeping. The DUI observations weren't made until after they got him out of the car. Thus, the initial search and seizure was unlawful.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Mar 3, 2021	Case: 20-CT-004138	Judge Jeske
Facts:	The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash. The officers observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, glassy eyes, and he appeared unsteady. The defendant exhibited an orbital sway and was yelling at the officers. After performing field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	After performing the walk and turn, the defendant started to perform the one leg stand then refused. He was immediately arrested without being given any adverse consequences. Thus, his refusal to perform the rest of the roadsides would have been excluded from evidence.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Mar 1, 2021	Case: 20-CF-011269	Judge Kiser
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for running a red light. The officer observed an odor of alcohol and bloodshot eyes. He had trouble fining his documents and had a slight slur to his speech. He then performed various field sobriety tests and was subsequently arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. In a search incident to arrest, the officer found a controlled substance, Alprazolam, which was not prescribed to the defendant. He was also charged with felony possession along with the DUI.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State that there was a lack of probable cause to arrest the defendant based on all the evidence. The State Dropped the DUI and also we were able to get the felony Dismissed.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 25, 2021	Case: ACEV1YE	Judge Komninos
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving and almost hitting other vehicles. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes. and slurred /slow speech. He appeared disoriented and was sweating. The defendant performed various field sobriety tests such as the walk and turn and one leg stand. He was then arrested for DUI and subsequently refused the breath test.
Defense:	Many of the observations written by the officer were contradicted by the video tape.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 25, 2021	Case: 20-CT-012371	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and red/glassy eyes. He also exhibited unstable balance. He then performed field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	Parks and Braxton pointed out to the State that there was a lack of probable cause to arrest the defendant based on the video tape evidence
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 24, 2021	Case: 20-CT-007529	Judge Mcneil
Facts:	The defendant was stopped in the roadway with fresh damage to her car and only one working taillight. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. She had difficulty with her balance and admitted to having drank beer and vodka. After performing poorly on roadside tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .183 and a .177 in the breath machine.
Defense:	An initial call for service went out over dispatch about the defendant's driving prior to her being stopped. There was no corroboration of any driving pattern by the officer. Thus, the lawfulness of the traffic stop was called into question.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 24, 2021	Case: 20-CT-007451	Judge Weis
Facts:	The defendant was the at fault driver in a crash. He struck a golf cart while driving erratically. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He had some balance issues as well. He refused to perform field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .108 and a .105 in the breath machine.
Defense:	There was doubt as to whether the defendant's breath alcohol level was above the legal limit at the time of the crash since it was administered hours later. It was unknown if he was absorbing or eliminating alcohol due to the time frame. Also, many written observations in the reports were also contradicted by the video.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 18, 2021	Case: 20-CT-500966	Judge Gagliardi
Facts:	The defendant was stopped by police at a DUI roadblock checkpoint. Officers observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, glassy/watery eyes, and slurred speech. He then started to perform the roadside tests but did not continue to perform them. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	Under Florida law, there must be a specific set for written guidelines for each individual roadblock. Here, they were somewhat vague as to specifics and did not meet with Florida Supreme court standards.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 16, 2021	Case: 20-MM-001747	Judge J. Steele
Facts:	The defendant was stopped on his boat for speeding and for a safety inspection. Officers noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and sluggish movements. He then performed various field sobriety tests such as the palm pat and finger to nose. He was then arrested for boating under the influence and later blew a .146 and a .142 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The firm pointed out that there were issues with the breathalyzer machine. Right before he blew there was a failure readout in the machine. Thus the results could not be trusted
Result:	The State Dropped the BUI.

Feb 9, 2021	Case: 20-CT-000067	Judge Gutman
Facts:	The defendant was the at fault driver in a crash whereby he ran a stop sign and caused a crash with another car. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He admitted to having drank one glass of wine. After performing roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .090 and a .089 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The firm pointed out to the State that the defendant had brake issues which caused the car not to stop. Also, we pointed out there is a .02 margin of error in the breath machine. Thus, we were were able to place his breath test results under the legal limit.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 9, 2021	Case: 19-CT-003805	Judge Conrad
Facts:	The defendant was the at fault driver in a crash. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and blood shot eyes. He was confused about his location and admitted to having 4 shots of alcohol. He was taken to the hospital for injuries and later charged with DUI. He refused to provide a blood sample.
Defense:	The firm pointed out that some of the injuries that the defendant sustained could have as equally been attributable to any impairment from the crash versus alcohol.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 9, 2021	Case: AB0B20E	Judge Bedinghaus
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The defendant had an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. The defendant then performed the field sobriety tests such as the walk and turn and one leg stand. He was then arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The firm pointed out that the defendant had trouble with roadside tests because he had an injured leg. One could actually see the defendant limping around on the video tape.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 9, 2021	Case: 19-CT-017699	Judge Gutman
Facts:	The defendant was found passed out in his car by police in the middle of the night behind a closed business. Upon awakening the defendant, the officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glossy eyes. He admitted to having drank alcohol at a club. He performed very poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .216 and a .214 in the breath machine.
Defense:	Prior to trial, the frim filed a motion to suppress the lawfulness of the initial detention. In our motion we put forth there was no reasonable suspicion of a crime justifying ordering the defendant out of the car as he was simply sleeping. Also, there were many contradictions in the officers' reports. One officer stated that the defendant was found sleeping while another stated he saw the defendant getting in and out of his car as well as driving around the parking. lot. Their credibility was now called into question. The State Dropped the DUI prior any motion hearing.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 3, 2021	Case: 20-CT-045024	Judge Babb
Facts:	The defendant was stopped at a red light. When the light turned green, she did not move for several seconds. The officer then initiated a traffic stop. He observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. After performing poorly on roadside tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .179 and a .177 in the breath machine.
Defense:	Although the defendant did not drive immediately, there was no infraction since no traffic was affected. In today's day and age with technology, one could have been looking at their cell phone or radio etc. The lawfulness of the traffic stop was called into question.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 2, 2021	Case: 19-016495MU10A	Judge Gottlieb
Facts:	He had a flushed face and appeared very sleepy. As the investigation went on, officers believed that the defendant was impaired by drugs, and not alcohol. He then performed field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later provided a urine sample which tested positive for marijuana.
Defense:	The firm took pretrial depositions of the officers. After lengthy questioning, we were able to establish that there was no "reasonable cause" pursuant to the DUI Statute for the officers to have even requested urine to begin with. Due to the fact the State could lose the urine test, they Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 2, 2021	Case: 20-CT-009386	Judge Conrad
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. Officers noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and he admitted to having drank beer and smoked marijuana. There were several empty beer cans in the car. After performing roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .20 and a .182 in the breath machine.
Defense:	Many observations written by the officer were contradicted by the video tape.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 2, 2021	Case: 20-CT-010050	Judge Conrad
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He then performed numerous roadside tests on tape. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The firm pointed out that any impairment could have just as easily been caused by the defendant's very high blood sugar taken by EMS at the scene versus alcohol.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

←75 / 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