| Oct 7, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-002584 | Judge Farr |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for running a stop sign. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy/watery eyes, and a flushed face. He also had slurred speech and he admitted to having drank two drinks. After performing roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .183 and a .171 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | Prior to any trial date, the firm was able to point out many inconsistencies with the discovery to the State. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
Parks & Braxton, PA: Brevard DUI Lawyer
ALSO SERVING VOLUSIA, Saint Lucie, Seminole, Orange and Osceola counties
Also Serving Volusia, Saint Lucie, Seminole, Orange and Osceola counties
OUR RECENT VICTORIES
| Oct 7, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-001608 | Judge Farr |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for weaving within his lane multiple times. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. He admitted to having drank two 24 ounce beers and appeared unsteady. After performing field sobriety tests he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | Upon viewing the video, the firm brought it to the State's attention that there was no probable cause to arrest the defendant based on his performance on the roadside tests. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Oct 5, 2021 | Case: 20-CM-004088 | Judge Gutman |
| Facts: | The defendant's boat was boarded by HCSO for a safety inspection, as well as an improper display of the registration on the boat. Upon contact, the officer observed and odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. He then performed roadsides on the boat such as the palm pat and hand coordination exercises. He was then arrested for Boating under the influence (BUI) and he later blew a .128 and a .117 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | According to the police reports, there were body worn cameras worn by Florida Fish and Wildlife Police officers who were on scene along with the Sheriff's officer. Those videos were not turned over by the police department to the prosecutor. | |
| Result: | The State Dropped the Boating Under the Influence. | |
| Oct 5, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-001915 | Judge Gutman |
| Facts: | The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash. When officers arrived, they noticed the defendant to have red/glassy eyes, a drowsy appearance, and slow movements. Believing that she was impaired by drugs and not alcohol, she was asked to perform roadside tests. She performed poorly and was arrested for DUI She later refused a urine test. | |
| Defense: | Under the Florida DUI statute 316.193, to prove DUI, the State must prove that the defendant was impaired by either alcohol and/or a specific chemical and/or controlled substance. Here, the State could not prove by what specific substances were impairing her. | |
| Result: | The DUI was dismissed. | |
| Oct 4, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-007533 | Judge Zuckerman |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped after a call went out about the defendant hitting a construction sign. The officer found the defendant's car and noticed it weaving and speeding. Upon stopping the defendant, the officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and watery/bloodshot eyes. The defendant swayed while sitting in her seat. She then performed various field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | Prior to trial, the firm brought many inconsistencies in the discovery to the State's attention such as conflicts between the video and the police reports. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Oct 4, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-007995 | Judge Zuckerman |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for swerving in his lane and his tires hit the lane dividers several times. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and red eyes. He also stated he had consumed one drink. After performing field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | Due to vagueness written in the specifics of the driving pattern, issues were raised as to the lawfulness of the traffic stop. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Oct 1, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-003392 | Judge Farr |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer detected a strong odor of alcohol, red/watery eyes, and she appeared unsteady. After performing various roadside tests, she was arrested for DUI. | |
| Defense: | Issues were raised as to a lack of probable cause to arrest the defendant. The State agreed and Dropped the DUI. The defendant received no conviction on her record. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Oct 1, 2021 | Case: 2021-306177MMDB | Judge Feigenbaum |
| Facts: | The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and droopy eyelids. The defendant admitted to having drank 3 or 4 beers. He then performed various field sobriety tests such as the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand. He was arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | On video, there were about four officers trying to conduct the DUI investigation. One appeared to be training the other and two others had no clue what was going on. For example, during the HGN(eye test), while one officer was administering the test, the other one was taking notes of the observations. However, the one taking notes was off to the side and couldn't even see the defendant's eyes. While giving the instructions on the walk and turn, the officer was reading off a standard instruction sheet of paper which totally confused the defendant. After reviewing the tape, the State Agreed with the firm and Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Sep 30, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-008824 | Judge Booras |
| Facts: | A concerned citizen dialed 911 stating that the defendant was traveling erratically all over the road. The officer spotted the defendant and conducted a traffic stop. The officer then noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he was lethargic in his movements. He then performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | Since the officer didn't observe any type of driving pattern, the lawfulness of the stop was called into question. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Sep 24, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-003572 | Judge Conrad |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for driving without headlights at night. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and difficulty following instructions.. She appeared unsteady, uncoordinated, and swayed. She performed various roadside tasks such as the walk and turn and one leg stand. She was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | Many of the observations written by the officers were over exaggerated as compared to what can be viewed from the body worn cameras worn by the officers. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Sep 23, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-022318 | Judge T. Brown |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped after driving on the white solid line and cutting across five lanes of travel. Officers noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, dilated/watery eyes, and he had to shuffle around to find his documents. The defendant denied having anything to drink. His speech was mumbled and he was slow in his movements. After performing various roadside tests such as the finger to nose and one leg stand, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | The lawfulness of the stop was called into question as the specifics of the driving pattern were vague and no traffic seemed to be affected. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Sep 23, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-026157 | Judge T. Brown |
| Facts: | A concerned citizen called 911 stating that the defendant was driving recklessly by failing to maintain a single lane. When the officer spotted the defendant, he was drifting between three lanes of travel affecting other traffic. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he swayed while he stood. He performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | Many observations written by the officer were contradicted by the video tape leading to credibility issues. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Sep 21, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-005076 | Judge Conrad |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for failure to maintain a single lane. Once stopped, the officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and red eyes. She also swayed while she stood. After performing roadsides, she was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .191 and a .189 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | The legality of the traffic stop was called into question after a review of the video and police reports. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Sep 21, 2021 | Case: AEL8FXE | Judge Bedinghaus |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for weaving and drifting in her lane. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and she fumbled with her documents. She also had a flushed face and watery eyes. After performing various field sobriety tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | Due to the lack of specificity written by the officer about the field sobriety tests, there was a lack of probable cause. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Sep 20, 2021 | Case: 19-029972MU10A | Judge Carpenter-Toye |
| Facts: | The defendant was the at fault driver in crash. He made made a wide turn and hit another car. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, slow/slurred speech, and he swayed while he stood. He also had watery eyes and and he would repeat things as he spoke. The defendant refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | When a defendant refuses to perform roadside tests the officer must advise the defendant of adverse consequences before the refusal may be admitted into evidence. In this case, the firm filed a motion to exclude the refusal because the officer did not follow the law. The Judge granted the motion and the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Sep 17, 2021 | Case: 20-010874MU10A | Judge Levy |
| Facts: | The defendant was the at fault driver in a crash. He made an improper turn and failed to yield the right of way. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he had no idea what had happened. The defendant refused to perform field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI. | |
| Defense: | Under Florida law, one can only be asked for a breath test after being arrested for DUI. Here, the officer improperly asked the defendant for a breath test prior to arrest. The firm also filed pretrial motions to exclude statements that were taken in violation of Miranda and also a motion to exclude the refusal to perform roadsides. The firm took pretrial depositions of the witnesses in which there were many inconsistent statements made by the officers. The State Dropped the Defendant's Second DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Sep 15, 2021 | Case: 19-CT-001292 | Judge Gould |
| Facts: | The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash. When officers arrived, they noticed the defendant to have an odor alcohol, the defendant admitted to having drank a mojito, he had thick tongued speech and glassy eyes. After performing various field sobriety tests such as the one leg stand and walk and turn, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .127 and a .126 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | Prior to trial, the firm uncovered various documents on the particular breath machine that the defendant blew into. It showed that the officers never did the required inspections and the machine failed many times. A week prior to the trial date, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Sep 14, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-031827 | Judge Jacobus |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for a traffic infraction by a local police department officer. He then called for the Sheriff's office to conduct a DUI investigation. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and he seemed confused. After performing the field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew. a .152 and a .149 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | The defendant was detained longer than necessary for the initial officer to write the traffic ticket. Thus, the issue was raised by the firm whether he was unlawfully detained too long for the DUI cop to arrive. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Sep 14, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-017703 | Judge Atkin |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for driving the wrong way on the road and almost causing a head on collision. Officers observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and slow speech. The defendant staggered and admitted to having drank whiskey. Due to his intoxication level, roadside tests were not conducted for safety reasons. He was then arrested for DUI and later blew a .228 and a .222 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | After extensive negotiations and the firm pointing out some inconsistencies in the evidence, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Sep 14, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-023554 | Judge Jacobus |
| Facts: | The defendant was the at fault driver in a parking lot fender bender. The eyewitness at the scene identified the defendant as the driver. The defendant and her friend then switched seats. When officers made contact, the defendant was now in the passenger seat. She was asked to step out of the car. Once out, officers observed her to have an odor of alcohol, mumbling speech, and slow movements. She then performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | The defendant denied ever being the initial driver involved in the crash. Questions were then raised by the firm as to the accuracy of the eyewitness’s identification. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
OBTAIN IMMEDIATE LEGAL HELP
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.