Also serving Volusia County (Daytona)
Call 24/7 Nights, Weekends & Holidays Free Consultations
The defendant was observed by DUI task force sleeping behind the wheel at a green light. After approximately 20 seconds, the defendant made a left turn. The defendant then failed to maintain a single lane by driving over the bike lane which was captured on video. The defendant pulled over and performed field sobriety tests also on video. He was subsequently arrested and blew a .096 in the breath machine.
Parks & Braxton filed a motion to suppress based on an unlawful stop. Despite the fact that the motion to suppress the stop was denied, the deputy provided several statements on the stand that were inconsistent with both the video as well as his reports.
On the morning of trial the State dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped for failing to maintain a single lane. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and unsteadiness. According to the officer, he failed the field sobriety tests which were not video taped. After his arrest for DUI, he refused the breath test.
Parks & Braxton filed a pre-trial motion to suppress the lawfulness of the initial stop of the defendant's vehicle.
Prior to the motion ever being heard, the State Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was found passed out slumped over the wheel of his vehicle with drool protruding from his mouth. The engine was running and the keys were in the ignition. After the officer woke the defendant up he requested his drivers license. The driver first produced a take-out menu and then provided a $100.00 bill. After speaking with the defendant, the officers observed a strong odor of alcohol, red glassy eyes, flushed face and slurred speech. The defendant admitted to drinking 5 mixed vodka drinks. The defendant performed and allegedly failed the field sobriety tests. He was subsequently arrested for DUI.
Parks & Braxton took the depositions of both officers on scene. The arresting officer was unable to provide a clear and independent recollection to the facts that were included in his reports.
The DUI was dismissed.
The defendant was stopped for running a stop sign. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, and he admitted drinking three rum and cokes. A bottle of vodka was found in the car. After performing poorly on the roadside tests according to the officer, he was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial.
The State Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped for running a stop sign. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, slow movements, and slurred speech. According to the officer, he failed the roadside tests. For example, on the walk and turn test, he stepped off the line and stopped walking to regain his balance. On the one leg stand, he put his put down and swayed. After his arrest for DUI, he refused the breath test.
Parks & Braxton prepared for trial.
The defendant was stopped for weaving. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant could not perform any roadside tests due to his high level of intoxication. After his arrest for DUI, he blew a .237 and .242 in the breath machine.
The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, he swayed while standing, and dropped his driver's license. According to the officer, he did not perform to standards on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
Parks & Braxton were ready for trial.
The defendant was found passed out behind the wheel of his car up on a curb. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He admitted to sharing two pitchers of beer. The defendant refused to perform the roadside tests as he became argumentative. After his arrest for DUI, he blew a .153 and .151 in the breath machine.
The defendant was stopped for running a stop sign. The officer smelled an odor of alcohol. The defendant also had a difficult time exiting her vehicle. The officer called for DUI task force to complete the investigation. The defendant agreed to perform field sobriety tests. On the finger to nose test she failed to remove her finger from her nose and failed to keep her eyes closed. On the one leg stand she dropped her foot after 3 seconds. On the walk and turn test she took 29 steps instead of 18 steps. She stepped off the line and failed to walk heel to toe. The officer arrested the defendant for DUI. This was her second DUI.
Despite the officer's report indicating her poor performance on the field sobriety tests, there was no video to substantiate his observations. As a result, Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial.
The State dropped the DUI on the morning of trial.
The defendant was stopped for running a stop sign and weaving. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, he took almost five minutes to find his registration, and he stumbled upon exiting the car. The defendant stated he had drank a few beers. He failed the roadside tests according to the officer and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest for DUI, he blew a .138 and .140 in the breath machine.
Parks & Braxton were prepared for trial.
The defendant was stopped for failing to maintain a single lane. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, mumbled speech, and bloodshot eyes. According to the officer, he failed the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State that the officer made several errors in his reports. The most important being a mistake of the race of the defendant.
The defendant was stopped for swerving. The officer noticed the defendant to be disoriented/confused, an odor of alcohol, mumbled/slurred speech, watery eyes, and he almost fell getting out of the car. He failed every roadside test and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .234 and .229 in the breath machine.
Parks & Braxton prepared the case for trial.
The defendant was stopped by a police officer as he was walking out of a concert. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and saw the defendant stumbling. She told the defendant do not drive. About 45 minutes later, he was seen driving out of parking garage and was then stopped again in his car. A DUI officer was called and made similar observations. The defendant was requested to perform the roadside tasks and did not perform up to standards. He was then arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and the defendant admitted to drinking. According to the officer, he did not perform up to standards on the roadside tests. For example, on the walk and turn test, he stepped off the line and took an incorrect number of steps. On the one leg stand test, he put his foot down and swayed. He was then arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
The defendant was stopped for swerving. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, fumbling fingers, and watery/glassy eyes. The defendant exhibited lethargic movements and admitted to drinking beer. According to the officer, he failed the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .153 and .156 in the breath machine.
Parks & Braxton filed a pre-trial motion to suppress the breath test results. In our motion, we alleged that the officer misinformed and misstated the law as to the consequences of refusing and/or blowing over the legal limit.
The Judge granted our motion and threw out the breath test results. The State then Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped for running a red light and swerving. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, and he was unable to maintain his balance. He did not perform up to standards on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .234 and .224 in the breath machine.
The defendant was stopped for driving the wrong way down a one way road towards a patrol car. A traffic stop was conducted and the officer noticed an odor of alcohol, unsteadiness, and bloodshot eyes. According to the officer, the defendant performed poorly on the video taped roadside tests. He was then arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .092 and .085 in the breath machine.
The defendant was stopped for not being able to maintain proper lane positions and then veered into an other lane narrowly missing two other cars. He then pulled into a gas station and was ordered out of the car. The officer then noticed bloodshot/watery eyes, unsteadiness, a fumbling dexterity, and mumbling speech. The officer also noticed a white frothy substance on the corners of the defendant's mouth. The officer suspected that he was impaired by a chemical and/or controlled substance and requested the defendant to perform field sobriety tests which the defendant refused. He was arrested for DUI and then later refused a urine test. After his arrest for DUI, the officers found Hydrocodone and also charged him with felony possession.
Pre-trial, Parks & Braxton presented prescription evidence to the State that the defendant had a valid prescription of the hydrocodone at the time of the arrest. Also, prior to the jury trial date, we pointed out to the State that the officers had an in-car video camera. However, they never filmed the defendant for almost the entire time of the DUI investigation. Rather, they filmed the gas station for almost the whole time.
The State Dismissed the Felony possession charge and on the day of jury trial they Dropped the DUI. It should be noted, this is the second time the firm has gotten this client's DUI dropped in the past five years.
The defendant was stopped for weaving. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, she was falling asleep, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. The defendant admitted that she felt the effects of the alcohol at the time of driving. She performed very poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she blew a .129 and .128 in the breath machine.
The State dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slow/slurred speech, and the defendant admitted to consuming two drinks. According to the officer, she failed the roadside tests which were not video taped. For example, she mixed up the letters to the alphabet several times on the alphabet test. Furthermore, on the one leg stand, she put her foot down numerous times. Also, on the walk and turn, the first time she tried it she took 16 steps instead of the required 9 steps. She was arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Parks & Braxton prepared the case and announced ready for trial.
On the morning of trial, the State Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped for speeding as he was driving over 120 miles per hour. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, a confused look, mumbled speech, and he used the car for support. He refused the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He then refused the breath test.
The defendant was stopped by police based on an anonymous call about a red pickup truck driving in a reckless manner. Officers observed the defendant's truck which matched the description given by the caller. The officer then observed an alleged driving pattern on his in-car video of the defendant. Once stopped, the officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. They also found an open bottle of whiskey in the truck. He performed very poorly during the roadside tests on video tape and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .252 and .252 in the breath machine.
Parks & Braxton filed a pre-trial motion to suppress the lawfulness of the initial stop of the defendant's truck. In our motion, we alleged that the officer did not observe any driving pattern on video tape consistent with a "reckless" driver as required by Florida Law.
On the day of the motion hearing, the State Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped for almost cutting off another car at an intersection. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and lethargic movements. The defendant could hardly stand according to the officer without assistance. He was asked to sit down for safety purposes. The defendant refused all roadside tests on video tape. After his arrest, he refused the breath test. This was the defendant's second DUI.
Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State that all of the observations by the officer were contradicted by the video tape.
The defendant was stopped for swerving all over the road. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, a confused look, raspy speech, and blood-shot eyes. He performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .143 and .147 in the breath machine. Defense Parks & Braxton were ready for trial.
The defendant was stopped for swerving and having no headlights. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, low speech, and watery eyes. He performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .139 and .142 in the breath machine.
The defendant was found by police sitting in his car through several red and green light cycles. Upon contact, the officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and slurred speech. He performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .108 and .101 in the breath machine.
The defendant was stopped by the police after he allegedly backed his white car into a green dumpster which was allegedly witnessed by the officer. The officer then noticed an odor of alcohol, red eyes, slurred speech, and the defendant was verbally combative. According to the officer, he failed the roadside tests which were not video taped. He was then arrested for DUI. He then refused the breath test.
Parks & Braxton took a pre-trial deposition of the arresting officer. In deposition, we pointed out that the officer never even checked to see if there was any paint transfer from the dumpster to the car. Also, it was brought out during questioning that the defendant performed much better on the roadside tests than described in the reports as the officer wrote a very vague report with hardly any details. The officer also could not remember many specifics.
The defendant was stopped for allegedly driving erratically. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and slurred speech. According to the officer, he performed poorly on the video taped roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. Paramedics arrived due the defendant having a major medical situation due to a diabetic condition. Once taken to jail, he blew a.158 and .164 in the breath machine
Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State that the majority of the driving pattern on video tape showed no erratic driving. Also, the machine the defendant blew into had prior maintenance problems. Further, we pointed out to the State that the defendant's medical diabetic condition that he was suffering from at the scene could have enhanced the breath test readings.
The defendant was stopped at a stop sign on a side street arguing with his girlfriend who was across the street. The officer pulled up and told the defendant not to move his vehicle. He also turned on his overhead police lights. The defendant got out of the car and was told to get back in the car. Upon contact with the defendant, the officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and lethargic movements. According to the officer, he failed the video taped roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .087 and .086 in the breath machine.
Parks & Braxton filed a pre-trial motion to suppress the lawfulness of the initial contact with the defendant. In our motion, we alleged that the officer gave numerous commands (ie. shows of authority) to the defendant without probable cause or reasonable suspicion of a crime. Also, the video contradicted the officer's reports of his observations of the defendant's roadsides, speech pattern, and movements.
The defendant was the at fault driver in a two car crash. Officers smelled an odor of alcohol, saw bloodshot eyes, and a flushed face. According to the DUI officer, he failed the video taped roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .130 and .133 in the breath machine. It should also be noted that marijuana was found in the car and the State charged the defendant with possession of marijuana.
Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State pre-trial that the video tape of the defendant's roadside tests contradicted the officer's reports and the defendant's breath test level.
The State Dropped the DUI and dismissed the possession of marijuana charge.
The defendant was stopped for running a red light. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot/watery eyes. According to the officer, he performed poorly on the roadside tests which were video taped. He was then arrested for DUI and after his arrest he refused the breath test.
Parks & Braxton were prepared and ready for trial. The video contradicted the officer's reports as to the defendant's performance on the field sobriety tests.
The defendant was stopped for speeding in a work zone. The officers noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, and she was very off balance. She refused to participate in field sobriety exercises and was arrested for DUI. She then refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Third DUI.
Parks & Braxton conducted a pre-trial investigation gathering evidence from the jail booking area which showed the defendant being tased for no reason, strapped into a chair, and thrown into a locked room. This corroborated her story that the officers were very aggressive towards her during the entire DUI investigation. We showed this to the State the before the trial date along with pictures of the defendant's injuries caused by being tased.
On the morning of Jury Trial, the State dropped the DUI.
<p>The defendant pulled up to a flashing red light. The officer pulled in behind the defendant and another vehicle. The defendant's car failed to proceed through the flashing red light in a timely fashion according to the officer. The officer activated her emergency lights and pulled up next to the defendant's car in order to determine why the defendant was not proceeding through the light. The defendant rolled down his window and the officer noticed the defendant's movements were lethargic and speech was extremely slurred. Based on the officer's initial observations, she thought the defendant was impaired. The officer then went up to the car and observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and a flushed face. He handed a credit card to the officer instead of his driver's license. The defendant refused the roadside tests. Also, the defendant admitted that on a scale of 1-10 (ten being the most impaired) he was a seven and that he drank a lot. He was arrested for DUI and subsequently refused the breath test.</p>
<p>Parks & Braxton filed a motion to suppress the initial contact between the officer and the defendant. In our our motion, we alleged that the officer's initial use of her emergency lights constituted an unlawful seizure.</p>
<p>Based upon the motion, the State Dropped the DUI.</p>
The defendant was found passed out in his vehicle in a bank parking lot by police. The keys were in the ignition and the engine was running. It took several attempts for two officers to wake the defendant up. Once awoken, the officers observed the defendant to have strong odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and he was disoriented. He then performed very poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .177 and .161 in the breath machine. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
Parks and Braxton were prepared and were ready for trial. The firm pointed out to the State prior to trial that the defendant had no "capabilty" of operating the vehicle.
On the morning of jury trial, the State Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was the at fault driver in a two car crash. Upon the officer's arrival, the defendant was already outside the car. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and she was unsteady on her feet. The defendant refused the roadside tests and then was arrested for DUI. She then refused the breath test.
Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State in a pre-trial investigation that they could not place the defendant in actual physical control of the car at the time of the crash as required by Florida law.
Due to the above fact and speedy trial expiring, the DUI was Dismissed. It should be noted, this is the Second DUI a member of the firm has obtained a dismissal for this client on a DUI charge.
The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/watery eyes, slurred speech, and a sarcastic attitude. According to the officer, she performed poorly on the roadside tests which were video taped. She was then was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she refused the breath test.
Parks & Braxton prepared and were ready for Trial.
On the morning of Jury Trial, the State Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was found passed out in his car by the police outside a bar. The headlights were on and the engine was running. The officer noticed the defendant in the car to be drooling and unresponsive. It took the officer almost five minutes to awaken the defendant. He eventually noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes upon awakening him. The defendant stated he was at happy hour earlier. He was also argumentative and unable to follow instructions. He performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. This was the defendant's second DUI.
Parks & Braxton took a pre-trial deposition of the arresting officer. At the deposition, we established the defendant had no "capability" of operating the motor vehicle while sleeping.
The defendant was the at fault driver in a two car traffic crash. The officers observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, red eyes, and a flushed face. The defendant failed the roadside tests which were video taped and then was arrested for DUI. This was the defendant's second DUI.
Parks & Braxton took a pre-trial deposition of the arresting officer. In that deposition, we established through detailed questioning that the impairment the defendant exhibited could have been due to the crash along with her numerous prior injuries versus alcohol. She told the police on tape about numerous back injuries she suffered from prior the officer administering the tests.
The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glassy eyes. He also was unsteady, staggering, swaying, and clumsy on his feet per the officer. He performed very poorly on the roadside tests which were video taped. He was then arrested for DUI.
Prior to trial, Parks & Braxton obtained medical records from the defendant and presented them to the State. The records indicated that the defendant's impairment was due to a medical condition versus alcohol.
The defendant was stopped for driving without headlights. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and almost lost his balance upon exiting the car. According to the officer, he failed the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .087 in the breath machine.
Parks & Braxton announced ready for jury trial.
On the morning of trial the State Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was pulled over for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. The defendant exhibited slow and lethargic movements and could not seem to put the car in park. The defendant was asked to exit the car for purposes of a DUI investigation. The defendant stated over and over "I do not want to do this" and refused the roadside tests. He was then arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
The defendant was involved in a hit and run crash. He was stopped by the alleged victim and several other civilians were standing around him so he could not leave. Upon contact with the police when they arrived, the officers noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, a flushed face, and bloodshot eyes. He failed the HGN (eye test) and refused the rest of the tests. He was then arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
On the morning of trial, the State could not place the defendant in actual physical control of the motor vehicle. The State Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped for significant and continuous weaving in and out in his lane. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, red eyes, and slurred speech along with a heavy eastern European accent. The defendant explained the way he was driving to the officer in that he was arguing with his wife over directions and using the GPS. The defendant was asked to perform roadside tasks on video tape which he refused and then was arrested or DUI. He then refused the breath test.
Parks & Braxton prepared and were ready for jury trial. The firm pointed out to the State that the video tape was in conflict with officer's observations in his reports. We told the State that the alleged indicators of impairment used in the officer's decision to arrest our client were clearly based upon the client's accent, inability to understand English, and communicate properly with the officer.
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.