Also serving Volusia County (Daytona)
Call 24/7 Nights, Weekends & Holidays Free Consultations
The defendant was initially seen making a left turn from the far right lane. Shortly after, the defendant was driving down the center of both southbound lanes. The officer stopped the defendant and observed a very strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot watery eyes, and very slurred speech. The officer then called for a DUI investigator. The DUI officer made the same observations as well as a flushed face. Upon exiting the car the officer observed the defendant to be unsteady on his feet and that he fell backwards while standing. The officer also observed a cup with liquid in the passenger seat. The defendant refused all testing and was arrested for DUI.
At the license hearing, Parks & Braxton was successful in getting the DUI officer to admit that he fabricated a police report. The DMV subsequently returned his license. The testimony from that hearing was ordered and transcribed for the criminal trial.
Upon being made aware of the officer's testimony, the State dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped for swerving. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and slow movements. According to the officer, he failed the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .103 and .102 in the breath machine.
Parks & Braxton were ready for trial.
The State Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped for weaving all over the road and onto the grass almost hitting a lamp post. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he was having trouble focusing. He was asked to step out of the vehicle and he stumbled and almost fell. He could not stand without using his vehicle for support. He also admitted to drinking six beers. He performed very poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
Parks & Braxton negotiated vigorously with the State.
The defendant was stopped for driving to slow and affecting other traffic. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and unsteadiness. The defendant refused to perform the field sobriety exercises and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, the defendant refused to give a breath sample.
The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, swaying, and a flushed face. The defendant refused to perform the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
The defendant was involved in a crash whereby he side-swiped another car and struck a DOT sign. The officer observed slurred/thick tongued speech, swaying, and he appeared groggy. The officer believed the defendant to be impaired by a chemical and/or controlled substance. The defendant admitted to taking Xanax and a pain killer. He performed very poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused to provide a urine sample.
The State could not prove that the defendant was impaired at the time of the crash by the specific drugs as required by Florida law. The State Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped for swerving into a curbed median which eventually caused his tires to go flat. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and the defendant admitted to having a couple of beers. The defendant also had slurred speech and was unsteady. According to the officer, he failed the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
Park & Braxton were ready for trial.
The defendant was involved in a traffic crash. The victim followed the defendant and eventually spoke to a Florida Highway Patrol Trooper. The officer then came into contact with the defendant and observed an odor of alcohol, flushed face, bloodshot eyes, and vomit on the defendant. The officer informed the defendant that he was conducting a criminal investigation for DUI and requested the defendant to perform field sobriety tests. On the walk and turn test, the defendant missed heel to toe, stepped of the line, and turned improperly. On the one leg stand test, the defendant swayed, used his arms for balance, and put his foot down. The defendant was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .108 and .104 in the breath machine.
Parks & Braxton filed a motion to suppress based on coercion to take the field sobriety tests. In the motion, the defense alleged that the officer misstated the law regarding the defendant's obligation to perform the tests.
The State conceded the motion and then Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was involved in a one car crash whereby he hit a curb, went airborne, and then crashed into a fence and a wall. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He admitted to having a couple of drinks. He refused all roadside testing on video tape and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
Parks & Braxton prepared for trial.
The defendant was stopped for speeding and failing to maintain a single lane. The officer observed an odor of alcohol and bloodshot eyes. He was unsteady exiting the vehicle and also unsteady walking. According to the officer, he performed very poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .133 and .133 in the breath machine.
Prior to trial, Parks & Braxton discovered that the video tape in the officer's patrol car was either destroyed or never properly uploaded to the computer system. Thus, there was no video tape of the defendant's actions, appearance, and performance of the field sobriety tests.
Prior to filing any motion to dismiss for destruction of evidence, the State Dropped the DUI.
The Police received a call concerning a reckless driver. When the officer observed the defendant he was driving on a rim with sparks flying. The defendant refused to stop while two officers were following him with their lights and sirens on. Eventually, the defendant pulled into an apartment complex and parked his car. The officers ordered the defendant out of the vehicle several times and eventually had to pull him out. The officers observed signs of impairment and requested that the defendant perform field sobriety tests. After performing the HGN (eye test), walk and turn test as well as the one leg stand, he was arrested for DUI. The defendant refused to submit to a breath test.
Parks & Braxton took a deposition of each of the officers involved. Based on their inconsistent statements, the firm filed a motion to suppress all of the evidence based on an unlawful detention.
On the day of the motion, the State dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped based on numerous calls about her swerving all over the road. The deputy who stopped her also observed weaving. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and mumbled speech. She fumbled while looking for her driver's license and staggered upon exiting the car. The officer even had to grab her arm to help her with her balance. She then performed very poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she refused the breath test.
Parks & Braxton gathered numerous medical documents from the defendant pertaining to a severe medical condition that she has endured for years. We pointed out to the State that the medical condition prevented her from performing any of the field sobriety exercises well.
The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant admitted to having a couple of drinks. According to the arresting officer, he failed the video taped roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test. This was the defendant's second DUI.
Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State that none of the defendant's normal faculties were impaired on video tape.
Three days before Jury Trial, the State Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped for driving without head lights after dark. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and dilated pupils. He also observed bloodshot eyes and she used the vehicle for support. According to the officer, she failed the video taped roadsides. After her arrest, she refused the breath test.
Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State that there was a major problem with the video tape in that you could hardly even see the defendant performing the field sobriety exercises.
The defendant was stopped for weaving all over the road. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glassy eyes. A bottle of rum was found in the car. According to the officer she failed the video taped roadside tests. After her arrest for DUI, she refused the breath test.
Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State that the video tape contradicted the reports of the defendant's performance on the roadside tests.
The defendant was stopped for driving on the wrong side of the road almost colliding with a police officer. The officer approached the defendant and observed a strong odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, a flushed face, dilated pupils and slurred speech. She admitted to drinking and had difficulty exiting the car. She refused all testing. This is the 2nd time Parks & Braxton has successfully defended the client after being arrested for DUI.
Parks & Braxton filed a motion to suppress the refusal based on the officer's failure to provide adverse consequences. At the hearing the officer changed his story several times.
The Judge determined that the officer lacked credibility and granted the motion. The DUI was dropped.
The defendant was stopped after a civilian notified police that the defendant was allegedly throwing beer cans out his window while driving down the road. The officer, upon contact, noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, the defendant's clothing smelled like beer, and he swayed. According to the officer, he failed the roadside tests and he was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State that the defendant was not the one who was throwing the cans out the window as there were other people in the car. Also, the video tape contradicted the officer's reports.
The defendant was involved in a single car crash whereby he drove off the road and hit a light pole. The officer who arrived on scene observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he also was swaying as he stood. According to the officer, he failed the video taped roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After is arrest, he blew a .099 and .094 in the breath machine.
The defendant was seen by a civilian witness running several red lights. The civilian then observed the defendant weaving all over the road. The civilian witness called 911 and continued to follow the defendant. At one point the defendant exited her car and vomited on the side of the road before continuing on. Eventually, the defendant stopped and proceeded to throw up again. Eventually, the civilian was able to take the keys out of the car and prevent the defendant from driving. The first officer on scene observed a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, slurred speech and a flushed face. He also observed vomit and dirt all over her clothing. The officer then collected a sworn taped statement from the civilian witness. The defendant attempted but was unable to perform any of the field sobriety exercises. She was arrested and charged with DUI and DUI Enhanced. She subsequently blew a .202 in the intoxilyzer.
Parks & Braxton filed a motion to suppress based on an unlawful detention. At the motion, the civilian witness testified about the observations concerning the driving pattern. He also stated that he was a bartender and was capable of identifying individuals who were impaired. Nonetheless, on cross examination, the witness failed to testify about any specific observations that might be consistent with impairment other than the driving pattern. The firm argued that similar to an officer, a civilian cannot detain a person if there is no reasonable suspicion to believe the defendant is impaired.
The motion was Granted and both DUI charges were Dismissed.
The defendant was stopped for weaving and almost striking a median. The officer observed slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and the defendant was stumbling. The officer believed that he was impaired by a chemical and/or controlled substance. He then performed the roadside tasks on video. He performed very poorly. For example, on the walk and turn test, he used his arms for balance and fell off the line. On the one leg stand, he kept dropping his foot and the test was terminated. On the alphabet test, he stated the letters out of sequence. He was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he was requested to give a urine sample. That sample revealed numerous controlled substances in the defendant's system based on the lab results.
Parks & Braxton took the pre-trial deposition of the toxicologist who analyzed the urine sample. In deposition, the toxicologist could not state with certainty that the defendant was under the influence of those particular controlled substances at the time of driving as they could have been in his system for a lengthy amount of time.
The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and he had mumbled speech. The defendant was wobbly and unsteady upon exiting the car. The defendant refused the roadside tests and after his arrest for DUI he refused the breath test.
The defendant was in a parking lot playing loud music with the windows down. In addition, the defendant was not wearing his seatbelt. When the officer approached the vehicle, the defendant started to back-up and drive away. After several commands, the defendant stopped the vehicle. The officer observed a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, slurred speech and a flushed face. Upon exiting the car, the officer noticed that the defendant was unsteady on his feet. The defendant admitted to taking Xanax as well. The defendant refused all testing and was arrested for DUI.
Parks & Braxton filed a motion to suppress based on an unlawful stop. First, the statute dealing with loud music was declared unconstitutional. At the hearing, the officer testified that he was unaware at the time that the law was declared unconstitutional. The State argued that the officer could rely on a "good faith exception" despite the fact that the law was no longer valid. Parks & Braxton argued that since the DCA court had declared the law unconstitutional and published the case, the officer could no longer claim that he had a "good faith" basis to believe the law was still valid. In addition, Parks & Braxton got the officer to testify that he did not see the seatbelt violation until after he ordered the defendant to stop.
The motion was Granted. The DUI was DISMISSED.
The defendant was stopped for weaving. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and unsteadiness. He also used the vehicle for support. According to the officer, he failed the the video taped roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State that on video tape, none of the defendant's normal faculties were impaired.
The defendant was involved in a one car crash whereby he drove off the road and hit a pole. The defendant told the police that he was trying to avoid a crash with another car. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and unsteadiness. The defendant refused to perform the roadside tests on video tape and then was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath breath test.
The defendant was found passed out behind the wheel of his vehicle by police and fire rescue while blocking an entrance way to a drive thru. Upon awaking the defendant, the officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He admitted to having two drinks. After performing the roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .111 and .109 in the breath machine.
The defendant was observed passed out in his car in a parking lot by an officer. The car was running and his foot was on the brake. Upon contact with the defendant, the officers noticed an odor of alcohol, he was disoriented as to his location, and bloodshot eyes. After being asked to exit the car, the defendant swayed and had an un-even gait. He performed very poorly on the roadside tests and exhibited numerous signs of impairment. After his arrest for DUI, the defendant blew a .139 and .137 in the breath machine.
At jury trial, the defense pointed out to the jury that the breath test machine in question failed an inspection around the time frame that the defendant submitted to the breath test. The defense also argued that he was not in actual physical control of the vehicle since he had no capability to operate it while sleeping. Furthermore, the defense, through cross examination, showed the jury that the arresting officer was not credible.
In the middle of Jury Trial, the State Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped for weaving. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. According to the officer, he failed the roadside tests which were not video taped and he was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
The police made contact with the defendant as he was asleep behind the wheel of his car at a traffic light. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, he staggered upon exiting the car, and he had to grab the car several times for balance. According to the arresting officer, he did not perform up to standards on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
The defendant was stopped for obstructing traffic. The officer first noticed a bottle of spiced rum in the cup holder. The officer also noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, flushed face, and slurred speech. The defendant refused the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
The defendant was stopped for speeding. There was also a call that the defendant's car was allegedly involved in a hit an run crash. The officers noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and thick tongued speech. He admitted to drinking vodka and tonic. He also had to use the car for balance and swayed. He refused 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 defendant was not involved in any crash as the DUI ticket stated no crash and that he was never arrested for any hit and run. In addition, we pointed out that even thought the arresting officer had a working video camera in his car, the whole DUI investigation was not captured on tape. One could only see the defendant after he was arrested for DUI and at no other time.
The defendant was stopped for driving without headlights and speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and a flushed face. According to the officer she failed the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she blew a .116 and .112 in the breath machine.
Parks & Braxton prepared the case for trial.
The defendant was stopped by police for obstructing traffic. The defendant had an odor of alcohol, a flushed face, and watery eyes. The defendant was also observed swaying. The defendant refused to perform the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
The defendant was stopped for making an illegal u-turn. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He failed the field sobriety exercises and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .168 and .155 in the breath machine.
Parks & Braxton pointed out out to the State that the breath machine in question had some faulty equipment issues within a month after the the defendant submitted to the breath test.
The defendant lost control of his motorcycle and crashed into a concrete median. A witness saw the crash and called 911. The defendant was rushed to the to the hospital where the police showed up to speak with him. At the hospital, the officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. He also admitted to having three beers. The defendant's blood was obtained by the police which later revealed a blood alcohol level well over twice the legal limit. The defendant was subsequently arrested for DUI once the results came back over the legal limit.
Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State before trial that the police illegally obtained the defendant's blood test results.
The defendant was stopped for pulling out of a roadway/alley way without stopping. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy/watery eyes, and the defendant admitted to having three beers. The defendant performed the beginning portions of the roadside tests on video tape and exhibited signs of intoxication such as stumbling. He refused to complete each task to completion when asked by the officer. He was arrested for DUI and then he refused the breath test. It should be noted, this was the defendant's Third DUI.
Parks & Braxton filed a pre-trial motion to suppress the lawfulness of the initial stop of the defendant's vehicle. In our motion, we alleged there was no probable cause justifying the stop.
The State conceded the motion and Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped for weaving, driving too slowly, and nearly causing a collision. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He performed very poorly on the roadside tests and was verbally abusive toward the officer. He was arrested for DUI and then refused the breath test.
The defendant was stopped for failing to maintain a single lane while affecting other traffic. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. After performing the walk and turn test poorly, the defendant refused further roadside testing and was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she refused the breath test.
Parks & Braxton were ready for trial after taking a pre-trial deposition of the arresting officer.
The defendant was stopped for peeling out his tires while making a left turn and almost hitting other cars. The defendant had an odor of alcohol, slow speech, and watery eyes. He admitted to drinking six bottles of beer. According to the officer, he did not perform up to standards on the roadside tasks and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .192 and .191 in the breath machine.
The defendant was stopped for speeding and making a wide turn. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slow dexterity, and red/watery eyes. The defendant admitted to drinking a few beers and wine. On the roadside tasks, the defendant had difficulty balancing and was unsteady. He was then arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .084 and .082 in the breath machine.
Parks and Braxton were ready to go to trial.
On the morning of the jury trial date, the State Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped because the passenger side headlight was not illuminated. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant handed the officer a Wal-Mart receipt instead of his registration and insurance. The defendant had difficulty standing, swayed, and admitted to having three drinks. He performed the walk and turn test at the request of the officer. For example, he had trouble walking, took an incorrect number of steps, and started to early. After the walk and turn, the defendant started to do the one leg stand and stopped stating he was not doing any more tests. He was then arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
The defendant was stopped by the police after being observed weaving back and forth within his lane and hitting lane markers for nearly three minutes by the State Trooper. He was also speeding. The entire driving pattern for the whole time was captured on video tape. Once stopped, after not even immediately pulling over, the trooper noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. The officer also noticed a 24 ounce beer can in the car which was cold to the touch. The defendant performed the field sobriety tests at the request of the officer which were also video taped. For example , on the walk and turn test, instead of taking the required nine steps up and back down the line, the defendant took a total of 36 steps, started to early, and did not touch heel to toe. On the finger to nose, he never touched the tip of his nose on all six attempts. Furthermore, on the alphabet test, he said the same letter on two separate occasions. During the car ride, which was also video taped, one could hear the defendant's slurred speech as he would not stop talking. After his arrest for DUI, he refused the breath test.
At jury trial, Parks & Braxton argued that a DUI investigation goes beyond a driving pattern and the ability to speak. In this particular case, the firm argued that the client's ability to walk normally, maintain his balance, and to perform various portions of the field sobriety tests in a normal manner created reasonable doubt to whether his normal faculties were impaired as required by Florida Law.
The Jury found the defendant Not Guilty.
The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and he admitted to having two drinks. According to the officer, he failed the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .126 and .124 in the breath machine.
The defendant was stopped for weaving. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, a flushed face, and she had difficulty finding her documentation. The officer also observed her to be unsteady. She failed the roadside tasks and was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she blew a .192 and .197 in the breath machine.
The defendant was stopped for making an illegal u-turn and speeding. The trooper observed an odor of alcohol, glassy/watery eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant had poor balance and also leaned against his truck for balance. According to the officer, he failed every roadside test and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State prior to the trial date that the investigating trooper had an operational video camera in his patrol car but never even video taped the entire DUI investigation.
The defendant was stopped for driving on the rims of her tires as they were blown out. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. After performing poorly the field sobriety tests, she was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she blew a .189 and .197 in the breath machine.
<p>The defendant was stopped by the police after a person called 911 and stated the defendant was driving all over the road, running red lights, and hitting curbs. The officer stopped the car and noticed an odor of alcohol, severely slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and slow/lethargic movements. Once the defendant was outside the car, he was unsteady and incoherent. He performed the roadside tasks at the request of the officer whereby he appeared highly intoxicated. The defendant admitted drinking 4-5 beers that day and also apologized to the officer that he should not be driving. After his arrest for DUI, he refused the breath test. It should be noted that the breath technician at the police station also testified that the defendant was totally incoherent and obviously impaired which was all was captured on video tape. Furthermore, the State played the 911 tape at trial for the jury.</p>
<p>Parks & Braxton argued at trial that the defendant's impairment was caused from a severe head injury and concussion which occurred hours before his contact with the police as opposed to alcohol impairment. At jury trial, the defendant testified as to his head injuries, the defense showed pictures of a huge bump on his head, and that he was hospitalized immediately upon his release from jail. His mother also testified about his hospitalization and that he had to be awoken every two hours for almost four days.</p>
<p>The Jury found the defendant Not Guilty in less than ten minutes.</p>
The officer pulled up behind the defendant who was passed out in his car. The defendant was parked on the side of the road and the car was running. The officer then made contact with the defendant and noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. According to the officer, he failed the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .118 and .117 in the breath machine.
The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, droopy eye lids, slurred speech, and lethargic movements. The defendant admitted to drinking two beers. According to the officer, he failed the roadside tasks and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
The defendant was found passed out in a parking lot at approximately 1:00 in the morning. The officers stated that the keys were in the ignition and the engine was running. In addition, the officers said the vehicle was parked across two spaces. The officers observed a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, a flushed face as well as slurred speech. The officers then called for a DUI task force officer. The Trooper made similar observations to the other officers and conducted field sobriety tests. After the walk and turn test, one leg stand and the finger to nose test, the defendant was placed under arrest for DUI. The Trooper stated in his report that the investigation was placed on video. This was the the defendant's 3rd DUI offense.
Despite the Troopers contention, the video only captured a portion of a bumper and then the back of an empty police car. Parks & Braxton filed a motion to dismiss based on destruction of evidence. During cross-examination of the motion, the Trooper testified that he had previously fabricated a police report.
After the Trooper's testimony, the State dropped the DUI.
The defendant was detained by the police after a verbal dispute with a neighbor. The officer noticed the defendant with an odor of alcohol, stumbling, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. According 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 had no legal reason to initially detain the defendant as no crime was or had been committed.
The defendant was stopped for driving with loud music in violation of Florida Statutes. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. The defendant used the car door for balance and swayed. He performed poorly on the roadside tests according to the officer and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test. He was charged with not only DUI, but also a Second and/or subsequent refusal to submit to breath testing. This was also the defendant's Fourth DUI arrest.
Parks & Braxton went to jury trial on the case. The State tried the defendant on the refusal charge first, prior to the DUI, as they were separated by law. At jury trial, Parks & Braxton argued there was no probable cause to arrest the defendant for DUI which is an element of the refusal crime.
In the middle of jury trial, the State not only Dropped the DUI charge but also closed the refusal charge out very favorably to the defendant.
The defendant was stopped for weaving and making an improper right turn. The officer noticed an an odor of alcohol, a sway, and bloodshot/watery eyes. She then performed roadside tasks at the request of the officer on video tape. According to the officer, she did not perform up to standards and was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she refused the breath test.
Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State, prior to trial, that none of the defendant's normal faculties were impaired on video tape versus what was written in the officer's reports.
The State dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped for violating the State's move over law. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he stumbled. According to the officer, he failed the roadside tests. The officer wrote a very vague report as it related to the roadside tests. He was arrested for DUI and then subsequently refused the breath test.
The defendant was stopped for speeding and failing to maintain a single lane. The officer noticed and odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, unsteadiness, and slurred speech. The defendant admitted to drinking at a local bar. He failed the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. For example, on the walk and turn test, he took an incorrect number of steps and stepped off the line a number of times. On the one leg stand test, he almost fell over at one point. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
The defendant was encountered/stopped by the police when he drove up right behind a police officer who was on another traffic stop. According to the officer, he screeched his tires within five feet behind his patrol car in violation of the move over law. The officer walked up to the car and motioned to the defendant to roll down his window. The defendant complied and rolled his window down and the officer went up to the car. The officer stated the defendant had some slurred speech and an odor of alcohol. The officer then took the defendant's keys and put them on the roof. The defendant was then detained until a DUI unit arrived. The defendant then performed the roadside tests on video. He failed them all as he looked highly intoxicated and then was arrested for DUI. After his arrest for DUI, he refused the breath test. He was also charged with a second refusal.
Parks & Braxton filed a pre-trial motion to suppress. In our motion, we alleged that the defendant could not move over as another car was blocking him from doing so and he did slow down in his lane of travel as required. We also alleged that the officer's motioning to the defendant to roll his window down and the taking of his keys were seizures. It should be noted that the officer was impeached at the motion hearing based on his pre-trial deposition whereby he previously stated that he never smelled any alcohol. The defendant also testified at the motion hearing in total contradiction to the officer. For example, he testified that he ended up farther back from the patrol car and never screeched his tires.
The Judge Granted the Motion to Suppress, threw out all the evidence, and the DUI and Refusal charges were Dismissed.
The defendant was stopped for swerving. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and he admitted drinking three beers. According to the officer, he failed the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .188 and .174 in the breath machine.
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.