Also serving Volusia County (Daytona)
Call 24/7 Nights, Weekends & Holidays Free Consultations
The defendant was the at fault driver after crashing into several large barricades. When officers stopped the defendant, they noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred/incoherent speech. He also had a flushed face, admitted to having drank four beers, and a sway while standing and walking. He performed poorly on field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .156 and .140 in the breath machine.
The firm pointed out to the State, that on tape, the defendant's normal faculties were not impaired. His speech was normal and he was not off balance or unsteady in any way. He also was responsive, coherent, stood without a sway, and walked normally. He also performed the field sobriety tests much better on tape than as described in the police reports. The State watched the video, agreed with our position, and Dropped the DUI. He was also charged with not having a valid driver's license and that charge was Dismissed.
On tape, the defendant's speech was normal, he was not off balance, and he performed very good on the field sobriety tests. We put forth to the State that there was a lack of probable cause to arrest him.
After negotiations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped for driving without headlights at night. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and an unsteady balance. The defendant needed to lean on the officer’s front bumper and an electric box for balance. He performed poorly on roadside tests such as the walk and turn and one leg stand. He was then arrested for DUI. He later blew a .125 and .118 in the breath machine.
The officer made the defendant out to be a falling down drunk. The video contradicted all the reports. His performance on the field sobriety tests was much better on video than written.
After several conversations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped after he was seen driving the wrong way down a one-way street. He also had no lights on. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. He also was unsteady and stumbled. He then performed various field sobriety tests such as the one leg stand and walk and turn. He was arrested for DUI and later blew a .150 and .142 in the breath machine.
The defendant crashed his car into a light pole. When officers arrived, they noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. They also found Bush Light beers in the defendant's car and he swayed while he stood. The defendant refused to perform field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test.
The defendant was stopped for having an inoperable tag light. The office noticed an odor of alcohol, fast/mumbled speech, and glassy eyes. He fumbled with his documents, had dry mouth, and stated he had consumed two mixed drinks. He was unsteady when exiting he car, swayed while he stood, and walked very slowly. He performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .130 and .129 in the breath machine.
The defendant was stopped for an inoperative rear brake light and failing to maintain a single lane. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he moved slowly. The defendant also had bloodshot/watery eyes, had difficulty concentrating, and stated he had drank two shots of alcohol. He then performed the HGN (eye test), one leg stand, and walk and turn exercises. The defendant was then arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test.
After conversations with the State regarding the lack of evidence on tape that the defendant's normal faculties were impaired, the State agreed to Drop the DUI.
The defendant was found by police sitting in his running car while stuck on the railroad tracks. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred/rambling speech, and bloodshot/glassy eyes. The defendant performed very poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test.
Parks & Braxton filed a pretrial motion to suppress the breath test results. In our motion, we alleged that the defendant was coerced and misled into taking a breath test. The defendant is from Texas and had a Texas driver's License. On tape, at the breath testing facility, the officers were leading him to believe that if he refused a breath test, his license would also be suspended in Texas and that Florida's implied consent law also applied to Texas. That was misinformation. Based on that misinformation, he agreed to take the breath test. In addition, on tape, his speech was not slurred and he never staggered or appeared off balance. The Judge Granted the motion and suppressed (excluded) the breath test results from evidence. The firm then announced ready for trial. A few days before the trial date, the State Agreed to Drop the DUI.
After conversations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, they Dropped the DUI.
Police received calls about a reckless driver who was driving crazy and swerving (i.e. the defendant). Another caller responded that the defendant had crashed into a mailbox and left the scene of the accident. Officers conducted a traffic stop and noticed the defendant to have a droopy/drowsy expression, had slow/sluggish movements, appeared unsteady, stumbled, and swayed. His speech was slow at times and he had a red face. The defendant stated he had taken his prescription medicine. There was no odor of alcohol. Believing that he was impaired by drugs, he was asked to perform roadside tests. He performed very poorly and was arrested for DUI. He later provided a urine sample which came back from the FDLE lab positive for amphetamines. The defendant was also charged with leaving the scene of an accident.
On tape, the defendant's speech was not slurred and he did not appear off balance or unsteady. The State then Dropped the DUI after several negotiations.
The defendant was stopped for running a stop sign. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and he admitted to having drank alcohol. He was unsteady and had slow/belabored movements. He then performed various field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew .119 and .109 in the breath machine.
After conversations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was found passed out in her car in a bar parking lot. Security officers from the bar called the police since she was unresponsive. When police arrived, the officer went up to the car and made efforts to wake up the defendant. The defendant would not respond to verbal commands, so the office began to shake her until she opened her eyes. He then began to speak with her to determine if she was in distress. Additionally, the officer asked for her driver's license. She was incoherent and her speech was slurred. The officer then noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, her pants were down, and she exhibited a significant lack of balance once out of her car. She performed extremely poorly on roadside tests which were captured on video and was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .098 and .099 in the breath machine.
The defendant was found passed out in her car in the middle of the road. The gear shift was in drive and her foot was on the brake. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/glassy eyes, and she admitted to having consumed alcohol. On tape, her speech was very slurred. She then refused to perform any roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused a breath test.
The State dropped the DUI.
The firm pointed out to the State that on three separate occasions interferent was detected on the breath machine when the defendant blew just prior to getting the .125 and .123. Thus, the breath test results may have been compromised by unknown interferent.
After several conversations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, they Dropped the DUI.
On video tape, the defendant did not appear off balance or unsteady prior to roadside tests and his speech was not slurred. We also pointed out to the State that he had difficulty with the walk and turn and one leg stand exercises because he is 6 foot 4 and well over 230 pounds,. After negotiations, the State Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped after the officer observed her strike two curbs and failing to maintain a single lane. Once stopped, he did not smell any alcohol, but noticed glassy eyes, slow/belabored movements, unsteadiness, and she admitted to taking her prescribed medications. Believing she was impaired by drugs, she then performed various field sobriety tests such as HGN (eye test), the walk and turn, and one leg stand. She was then arrested for DUI and later refused a urine test.
The firm pointed out to the State that nothing can be heard on tape because the officer had his car radio blasting music. Additionally, we also pointed out that the defendant never stumbled and also performed much better on the roadside tests on the video versus what was written in the police reports.
On tape, the defendant's speech was normal, he was not unsteady, and did not appear confused. The State, after reviewing the evidence, Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped for speeding and running a red light. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and watery/bloodshot eyes. The defendant denied drinking any alcohol. He then performed the HGN (eye test), one leg stand, and walk and turn exercises. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test.
When a defendant refuses roadside tests, an officer must advise of the adverse consequences if one refuses (i.e. Taylor warnings). If they do not, the refusal will be excluded from evidence. Here, the officer did not follow the law and gave no adverse consequences. In addition, on tape, the defendant's speech was not slurred and he did not appear off balance.
There was no video in the case. After pointing out several inconsistencies in the reports to the prosecutor, the State Dismissed the defendant's Second DUI.
The defendant was stopped after he was observed drifting from side to side over the lane dividers several times. He also cut off another car which caused that car to brake and he also drove over the raised concrete median. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, he had slow/lethargic movements, and his eyes were bloodshot and watery. The defendant stated he had drank gin and was he was unsteady and swayed. A bottle of vodka was found in the car as well. He performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .132 and .130 in the breath machine.
When the officer approached the defendant, her keys were in her lap and the engine was off. Issues were raised by the firm whether or not the State could prove she was in actual physical control. The State agreed and Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped for running a red light, weaving within his lane, and driving over the line markers several times. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and slurred speech. He then performed several roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test.
The defendant was found passed out in his car. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred/mumbled speech, unsteadiness, and he admitted to having drank 4 to 5 shots of whiskey. He was completely disoriented as well. He then performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .137 and .134 in the breath machine.
The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/glassy eyes, and he stated he had consumed three beers. He also swayed while he stood. He then performed various field sobriety tests such as the walk and turn, one leg stand, and HGN (eye test). He was then arrested for DUI.
After negotiations, the firm pointed out that on tape none of the defendant's normal faculties were impaired and there was no probable cause to arrest him for DUI. The State agreed and Dropped the DUI. He received no conviction in his record.
Many of the details of the field sobriety tests were exaggerated in the reports as compared to the video tape.
After several negotiations with the prosecutor regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI.
To save your license, you must act within 10 days. Get in touch with our firm by calling 321.593.0222, or fill out the form here.