Also serving Volusia County (Daytona)
Call 24/7 Nights, Weekends & Holidays Free Consultations
Under Florida law, to prove DUI, the State must prove what the defendant was impaired by. Under the DUI statute, 316.193, it must be either alcohol, a specific chemical, or specific controlled substance and/or combination of the latter. Here, there was no odor of alcohol, no mention of drugs, no alcohol or drugs found. Thus, the State could not prove by what specific substance was impairing the defendant. One cannot just be impaired by "anything." The State Dismissed the DUI. It should be noted the firm also beat the defendant's first DUI a few years ago as well.
The DUI was dismissed.
The defendant was stopped for driving with no lights after dark. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, disorganized speech, and an unsteady/poor gait. The defendant agreed to perform HGN (eye test) and then refused to do any other roadside tests. She was arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test.
The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, he swayed while he stood, and had watery eyes. He then performed the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand exercises. He was subsequently arrested for DUI.
The defendant was involved in a crash with a police officer. The initial officers on the scene smelled an odor of alcohol as well as noticing unsteadiness on his feet. During the crash investigation the officer stated that the defendant's speech was slurred. The defendant was taken to a medical facility where a blood test was provided. The defendant's blood alcohol content was .109.
The officer who stopped the defendant was a different officer than the one who arrested him. On tape, the DUI cop who got called to the scene went right up to the defendant after a brief conversation with the stopping officer. When he went up to the defendant, he said "I believe you’re under the influence." We pointed out the State that that was ridiculous for him to conclude that when he hadn't even observed him yet or done any investigation. The officer's credibility was called into question and the State Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped for weaving all over the road. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and thick tongued/slurred speech. He admitted to having drank two to three beers and fumbled with his documents. He performed very poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .144 and .141 in the breath machine.
After negotiations with the prosecutor regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI.
The firm pointed out to the State that none of the defendant's normal faculties were impaired. Her field sobriety tests on tape were much better than as described by the officer in his reports. The State Dropped the DUI and the defendant received no probation or penalties other than court costs.
The defendant was stopped after being observed crossing over the solid white line in the bike lane and crossing back over the double yellow line. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/watery eyes, and slow/slurred speech. The defendant stated he had consumed 3 mixed vodka drinks. The defendant was slow to exit the car, slow walking, and swayed while he stood. He then performed various field sobriety tests such as HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and the one leg stand. He was arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test.
Calls went out over police dispatch that the defendant was driving the wrong way on the highway. Officers located the defendant's vehicle on the grass median facing in the wrong direction, like she had just pulled over. They observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and red/watery eyes. The defendant stated that she had drank two margaritas and was waiting on friends to pick her up. She performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. As the defendant was taking the breath test, she vomited. After a new 20-minute observation period was confuted and she then blew a .146 and .138 in the breath machine.
After conversations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI.
After conversations with the State about the evidence, we pointed out that the defendant was trying to do the right thing by not driving and pulling over to sleep it off. The State Dropped the defendant's Fifth DUI.
Parks & Braxton took pretrial depositions of the officers involved in the case. At depositions, not one officer could state that they smelled any alcohol on the defendant and none could state by what specific drug they thought was impairing the defendant. Thus, there was no reasonable suspicion of a crime to even justify legally requesting roadside tests. In addition, the officer administering the roadside tests came from another jurisdiction. That was in violation of a mutual aid agreement which did not specifically mention that officers from other jurisdictions can do DUI investigations. After conversations with State, they Dropped the defendant's Third DUI.
On video, the defendant performed very well on the roadside tests. We pointed out to the State that there was a lack of probable cause to arrest him. After several conversations with the State, they Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped for having no visible taillights and swerving erratically. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and heavy tongued/slurred speech. He also fumbled with his wallet and stated he had consumed two beers. He then performed various roadside tests such as the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand. He was arrested for DUI and later blew a .090 and .088 in the breath machine.
The defendant ran a stop sign causing him to crash his car into another vehicle and then into a tree. When the officer arrived, the defendant was moving the airbags out of the way and told the officer that he was "coming from the middle east." The officer observed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and slurred speech. While outside the car, he was stumbling around and almost fell over while walking. He refused to perform and field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. The defendant later refused a breath test.
The defendant had blood stains and also a cut on his elbow from the airbag. We pointed out to the State that the impairment observed could have been as easily from the severity of the crash and the airbags deploying versus alcohol. After negotiations, the State Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash in which airbags deployed. When officers arrived, they found the defendant unconscious (sleeping) in the rear back seat of his vehicle. After several attempts to awaken him, they noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and he was very unsteady. Officers determined that he was the driver as he had seat belt markings from his left shoulder and there was blood on his hands consistent with the blood on the steering wheel. In addition, he had airbag burns on his arms and it was the front driver's side airbag that deployed. After he was confronted with this evidence, he admitted to having been the driver that rear ended the other car. He performed poorly on field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .148 and .141 in the breath machine.
After several conversations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI.
The defendant crashed his car into a concrete barrier. Upon arrival, officers noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and thick-tongued speech. The defendant refused to perform field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test.
The defendant was stopped for driving erratically. She was swerving all over the road. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, watery/glassy eyes and slurred speech. She then performed various roadside tests such as HGN (eye test), the walk and turn, and one leg stand. She was subsequently arrested for DUI and later blew a .159 and .157 in the breath machine.
There were many conflicts between the video tape, the DRE report, and the police reports. After conversations with the State about the evidence, they Dismissed the DUI.
The defendant was stopped for weaving and drifting over the lanes of travel, driving on the lane itself, and also on fog line multiple times. The officer observed an odor of alcohol. He appeared jittery, had slow reflexes, and had slurred speech. He also had a sway to his stance and fumbled for his door latch. He refused to perform any field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. The defendant subsequently refused a breath test.
After negotiations with the State regarding the defendant and the evidence, the State Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was found passed out in his car by police in a lane of travel. There was no odor of alcohol, but officers, upon awakening him, noticed slurred speech, he kept nodding off, and appeared disoriented. He had bloodshot eyes, was unsteady, and swayed while he stood. Believing he was impaired by drugs, the officers requested him to perform field sobriety tests. He performed very poorly on the walk and turn and one leg stand exercises and was arrested for DUI. He later submitted to a DRE (drug recognition exam) and he also refused to provide a urine sample. Post arrest, drugs were found in the defendant's wallet. Those drugs tested positive for illegal controlled substances and he was also charged with two felony possession charges.
After several negotiations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI, Dismissed one felony, and he received No Felony Conviction on the other felony.
The State dropped the DUI.
After conversations with the defendant regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI.
The entire investigation was captured on body won camera. The officer wrote that they smelled alcohol inside the ambulance, yet on body worn camera (BWC), the officer can be heard coming out of the ambulance stating, "I cannot smell anything." No one even ever asked the defendant if he had drank that night. In addition, the defendant told them he had knee issues, hip issues, toe issues, and was just upside down in a rollover crash, yet the officers still had him stand on one leg and walk a line. Also, it was evident on tape that the officer conducting the roadside tests was brand new and being trained. Thus, this was a training exercise and the defendant was the guinea pig. After discussions with the State, they Dropped the DUI at trial call.
After conversations with the State regarding the defendant and the evidence, the State Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped for speeding and weaving all over the road. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, watery/bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. He also had slow movements. The defendant performed roadside tests such as the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand. The defendant was arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test. The defendant had a CDL license at the time of arrest.
After negotiations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped for weaving and speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, he was nervous and shaking, had bloodshot eyes, and he admitted to having drank vodka and smoked pot. He then performed various field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test.
After several conversations with the State about the evidence and the defendant, they Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was stopped for not wearing a seatbelt and accelerating and decelerating for no reason. The Officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/glassy eyes, and he admitted to having consumed three beers. He was clumsy, unsteady, and fumbled with his documents. He then performed various roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .175 and .172 in the breath machine.
After negotiations with the State regarding the defendant and the evidence, they Dropped the DUI.
The firm provided documentation to the State that the breath machine in question was taken out of service shortly after the defendant was arrested. Thus, the reliability of the defendant's results and the machine itself were called into question. We also provided medical documentation that the defendant had received injuries from the airbags during the crash, yet the officer still had him try to stand on one leg and do a walk and turn. After conversations with the State, they Dropped the DUI.
The defendant was the at fault driver in a traffic crash whereby he T-boned another car at an intersection. When officers arrived, they noticed an odor alcohol and bloodshot eyes. He then performed various roadside tests such as the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand. There was no video. He was then arrested for DUI and later blew a .121 and .113 in the breath machine.
The defendant was found by the police passed out in the driver's seat of her car at an intersection. Officers banged on the door multiple time without success. After numerous attempts to awaken her, fire rescue had to break the window to gain entry. She was then taken out of the car while still passed out. EMS used Narcan, but still got no response. A relative arrived on scene who advised that he had received a call that she had been drinking at a friend's house. She was then taken to the hospital. The officer then went to the hospital and observed her mumbling and she could not keep her eyes open. Blood was then drawn. The State Attorney's Office proceeded to get the results to see if there was any alcohol and/or drugs in her system. The blood revealed a blood alcohol result of over 500 (the equivalent of a .50 breath alcohol level, over 6 times the legal limit).
The defendant was stopped by police as he was observed driving the wrong way on a one-way road. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/watery eyes, and slurred/incoherent speech. He also swayed and appeared unsteady. He then performed the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand exercises. He was subsequently arrested for DUI and later blew a .180 and .175 in the breath machine.
An officer observed the defendant drive through a bar parking light at night with no lights on, he appeared to be struggling to stay wake, and he was bobbing his head with his eyes closed at times. The officer made contact with the defendant and observed an overwhelming odor of alcohol, slow/slurred speech, and watery eyes. He was asked to step out of the car. When the defendant was questioning why he had to step out, he was physically extracted from the vehicle. The defendant was then taken to the ground and handcuffed. He later stated he had drank four beers. The defendant was arrested for DUI and resisting an officer without violence. He later refused a breath test.
The defendant was stopped for driving at night with no lights and blocking a crosswalk at a red light. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, a flushed face, fumbling with her documents, slurred speech, and difficulty dividing her attention. She then performed the walk and turn, one leg stand, and HGN (eye test). She was arrested for DUI and later blew a .156 and .154 in the breath machine.
The defendant was stopped for weaving and pulling into an intersection, backing up onto a crosswalk right next to a cop. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and red/glassy eyes. The defendant stated he had drank one beer. He performed various roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test.
The defendant was involved in a crash. She tried to avoid an animal, struck a fence, and ended up in a cow pasture. No police came at that point, but the defendant was treated by EMS. She then left to go to the hospital. After the hospital, she and her family came back the crash site to get the car. A police officer was there inspecting the crash scene. He came into contact with her and asked her questions. The defendant admitted to being the driver at the time of the crash and that she had drank margaritas earlier before the crash. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol and bloodshot eyes. She then was asked to perform various field sobriety tests to which she complied. She was arrested for DUI over three and half hours after the crash. A little over five hours later after the crash, she blew a .065 and .068 in the breath machine. In his report, the officer tried to do a retrograde extrapolation placing the defendant's breath alcohol results at a .143 at the time of the crash.
The firm was able to provide evidence to the State that the defendant was not the at fault driver and that the other driver was as equally as culpable for the crash. In addition, the officer made the defendant out to be a falling down drunk in his reports which was not the case on the video tape.
The defendant was stopped for swerving all over the road. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and he was fumbling over his words. He also staggered as he exited the vehicle. He then performed various roadside tests such as HGN (eye test) and the walk and turn. While being instructed on the one leg stand, the defendant began to express his displeasure with the tests and would not stop interrupting the officer. At that point, he was placed under arrest for DUI. He later refused a breath test.
The defendant was stopped for driving recklessly around a parking lot. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and his movements were slow/sluggish. He also had slurred speech and appeared unsteady. He performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .193 and .188 in the breath machine.
The defendant was stopped for swerving all over the road, driving below the speed limit, and driving westbound in the eastbound lane. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, a flushed face, and thick tongued speech. Her eyes were glassy. She was also slow to respond, unsteady, and she exhibited mood swings. She performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused a breath test. This was the defendant's Third DUI. She was also charged with Felony possession of cocaine.
The defendant was found passed out in his vehicle on the side of the road by a road ranger. The car had run out of gas. When police arrived, the defendant was standing outside of his car. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, watery/glassy eyes, and incoherent/mumbling speech. He swayed while standing, was slow to respond, and appeared confused. He refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test. This was the defendant's Third DUI.
Under Florida Statute 901.15, all element of a misdemeanor DUI must occur in the presence of the officer unless there is a crash (i.e., they must observe the defendant driving or in actual physical control) or the arrest is unlawful. Here, the defendant was outside the car when the officer arrived so we pointed out to the State that the arrest was unlawful and they agreed. Also, when a defendant refuses to perform field sobriety tests, an officer must advise them of the adverse consequences for refusing. For example, the officer must state something like, "I am going to have base my decision to arrest you on what I have observed so far if you refuse." In addition, the officer can state to the defendant that their refusal can be used against them in court. If they do not give any adverse consequences, the refusal will be excluded from evidence. Here, the officer did not give the defendant any adverse consequences. The State Dropped the defendant's Third DUI and received no probation.
The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy/bloodshot eyes, and clumsy dexterity. She also had slurred speech, made repetitive statements, and had unsteady balance. She then performed various roadside tests such as the walk and turn, one leg stand, and HGN (eye test). She was subsequently arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
The defense pointed out various medical issues that the defendant had which could have affected her performance on the field sobriety tests. After conversations with the State, they Dropped her Second 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.