| Aug 9, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-004306 | Judge Damico |
| Facts: | A caller dialed 911 saying that that the defendant was involved in a hit and run crash. When officers stopped the defendant, they observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/watery eyes, and slurred speech. He then performed field sobriety tests such as the walk and turn, one leg stand, and HGN (eye test). He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | Due to a lack of specifies on the police reports as to the field sobriety tests, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| 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
| Jul 29, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-001396 | Judge Farr |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding. Officers noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and slurred speech. He also had a red face and appeared disoriented. After performing field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .150 and a .132 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | The defendant's performance on video tape during the field sobriety test clearly showed that he was lower than .08 at the time of driving. Thus, he would have be absorbing alcohol when he blew into the machine. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jul 29, 2021 | Case: 20-CT-004465 | Judge Farr |
| Facts: | The defendant was observed by an officer stumbling into a Waffle House. He noticed the defendant stumble, have slurred speech, and acting belligerent. The defendant then entered his car and drove off. Contact was made with the defendant at a gas station. Similar observations were made by police and he was asked to perform roadside tasks as officers believed he was impaired by drugs, and not alcohol. He performed very poorly and was arrested for DUI. He provided a urine sample which revealed Xanax and Marijuana once analyzed by FDLE. | |
| Defense: | The State could not prove how long the substances had been in his system. Thus, they couldn't prove he was actually impaired by those drugs. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jul 29, 2021 | Case: 20-CT-012168 | Judge Farr |
| Facts: | The defendant crashed her car into a mailbox then post. When officers arrived, they noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. She fumbled around with her paperwork and was very unsteady. After performing various roadside tasks, she was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | Many aspects of the video tape contradicted by the police reports. | |
| Result: | The State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Jul 19, 2021 | Case: AD0B9EE | Judge Vaccaro |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for driving without headlights. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and he admitted to having drank two drinks. After performing roadside tests on video, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. Prior to trial, we pointed out to the State that there was no probable cause to even arrest the defendant based on the video tape. Prior to trial, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jul 16, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-002688 | Judge Denkin |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for nearly crashing into other vehicles. The officers observed an odor of alcohol, thick tongued speech, and she was slurring her words. After performing poorly on roadside tests, she was arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | Due to inconsistencies in the reports pointed out by the defense, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jul 15, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-015462 | Judge Silverman |
| Facts: | The defendant was the at fault driver in a crash. The defendant had glassy eyes, slurred speech, and difficulty answering questions. The defendant was off balance and almost fell over. Believing that she was impaired by drugs, the defendant was asked to perform roadside tests. She refused and was arrested for DUI. She later refused a urine test. | |
| Defense: | An officer can only request a breath and/or urine test after one has been arrested. Here, the officer read her implied consent and requested a urine test prior to arresting her which was unlawful. Thus, her refusal to provide a urine sample would have been excluded from evidence. In addition, the State could not prove by what specific chemical and/or or controlled substance was allegedly impairing the defendant as required by Florida DUI Statute 316.193. . The State Dropped the DUI to a civil careless infraction. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jul 14, 2021 | Case: 20-CT-504148 | Judge George |
| Facts: | The defendant was the at fault driver when she hit a bus from behind. Officers observed slow/sluggish speech, her movements were slow, and she had watery eyes. The defendant admitted to having taken her prescription medicines. Believing she was impaired by a chemical and/or controlled substance, she was asked to perform field sobriety tests. She was then arrested for DUI. At the station, another officer who is a DRE (drug recognition expert) was called in to perform a DRE exam on her to determine what class of drugs was allegedly impairing her. She also provided a urine sample which later came back from FLDE positive for amphetamines. | |
| Defense: | The observations both the arresting officer and the DRE officer made were inconsistent with someone being impaired by amphetamines. In fact, the DRE officer concluded that she was impaired by a CNS Depressant which was not only wrong, but on the opposite spectrum of amphetamines. Someone who is impaired by amphetamines will appear euphoric and excited and not slow and sluggish. In addition, someone who is impaired by amphetamines will not exhibit HGN (the eyes test), nor have equal pupil size, like the defendant did. In addition, when the officer administered the roadside tests, he covered his body worn camera with his forearm and clip board so one could not even see the defendant's performance. | |
| Result: | The State Dismissed the DUI a week prior to the trial date. | |
| Jul 12, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-000056 | Judge Hill |
| Facts: | A call was made by the defendant's girlfriend that he was extremely intoxicated and got in his semi-truck and left the area. When police found him, he was parked in his semi at the entrance to his work. As officers approached the defendant, he was asked to exit the truck. He had extreme difficulty exiting the truck and then the officer noticed an odor of alcohol. They also observed a sway, red eyes, and he stated that he had "too many drinks to be driving." He performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Third DUI. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton got depositions granted of the two officers in question. Prior to the depos, in speaking to the officers, it was uncovered that when the officers found the defendant, he was sleeping in the bed of his truck. This information was not written in the police reports and would have never been uncovered if the firm did not attempt to take depos. The state could not prove that the defendant was in actual physical control of the truck. | |
| Result: | The State then Dismissed the defendant's third DUI. | |
| Jul 12, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-000304 | Judge Krause |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for drifting and almost striking another car. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant performed various roadside tests such as the estimation of time, one leg stand, and walk and turn. He was then arrested for DUI and later blew a. 098 and a .106 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | Due to the .02 margin of error in the breath machine, the firm was able to place one of the defendant's breath alcohol results under the legal limit. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jul 9, 2021 | Case: 19-00002MU10A | Judge Diaz |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/glassy eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant then performed various filed sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After being arrested, the defendant stated “he was supposed to have stayed in tonight had made a mistake." He later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. Prior to trial, the firm pointed out many inconsistencies between the officer's reports and the DUI video tape. Just prior to jury trial, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jul 8, 2021 | Case: 20-CT-010471 | Judge Farr |
| Facts: | The defendnat was found in a McDonald's parking lot by police after a concerned citizen called 911 that the defendant appeared to be intocxicated. Upon contact, officers observed an odor of alcohol, droopy/bloodshot eyes, slurred speech and he admitted to having consumed alcohol. Once out of the car, he appeared unsteady. After performing the roadside tests he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | Due to a lack of specifics by the caller, the police did not corroborate any indicators of impairment prior to seizing the defendant by ordering him our of the car. | |
| Result: | State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jul 8, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-005341 | Judge Moses-Stephens |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for weaving from side to side. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slightly slurred speech, and she stated she had drank a few glasses of wine. She exhibited mood swings and sometimes was difficult to understand. After performing various field sobriety tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | There was no reasonable suspicion to believe that she was sick, injured, or impaired when the officer stopped her, since no traffic was affected and the driving pattern did not go on for a long time. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jul 8, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-003996 | Judge Moses-Stephens |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for swerving and almost striking the fog line. The officer observed an odor an alcohol, red/watery eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant stated that he had one drink. The defendant performed various field sobriety tests. For example, on the one leg stand, he put his foot down, used his arms for balance, and swayed. He was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | Issues were raised as to the lawfulness of the traffic stop due to a lack of particulars. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jul 7, 2021 | Case: 20-CT-008396 | Judge Jeske |
| Facts: | The defendant was the at fault driver in a crash whereby he enterd an intersetion illegally. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. The defendnat refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | On tape, the defendant was arrested very fast after refusing the roadside tests. It gave the imrpession that the officer already had made up his mind that he was going to arrest the defendant whether he did the roadsdies or not. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jul 7, 2021 | Case: 20-CT-008545 | Judge Jeske |
| Facts: | The defendant crashed his car into a median then a building. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he leaned on objects for support. He denied drinking any alcohol. After performing roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | The officer made it out in his reports like the defendant was a falling down drunk. Almost all of his observations that were written were contradicted by the video. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jul 7, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-011446 | Judge Gutman |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol and bloodshot eyes. She then refused to perform all roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | In order to conduct a DUI investigation, the officer must be indicia of impairment. Here there was none, as she exhibited no erratic drving, no speech issues, and no balance issues. Thus, were was a lack of reasonable suspicion to even conduct a DUI investigation. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jul 7, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-003970 | Judge Gutman |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding and drfiting. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, watery/bloodshot eyes, and she admitted to having drank two alcoholic beverages. She then performed various field sobriety tests and was subsequently arrested for DUI. She later blew a .124 and a .116 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | When the officer did the HGN (eyes test), he did not get an angle onset of 45 degrees or less in the defendant's eyes. Under Tharpe's Formula, if that occurs, it may mean that the defendant was under the .08 legal limit. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jun 28, 2021 | Case: 20-CT-011713 | Judge Gutman |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, fumbling fingers, and watery eyes. The defendant refused to perform roadsides tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | There was a lack of reasonable suspicion of a crime for the officer to even legally request field sobriety tests. There must be indicators of impairment to justify the request. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jun 28, 2021 | Case: 21-CT-002061 | Judge Gutman |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for weaving. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol and bloodshot eyes. She admitted to having drank one or two drinks. She then performed the walk and turn and one leg stand tests. She was then arrested for DUI and later blew. a .159 and a .153 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | The defendant's video tape showed that she may have been lower than .08 at the time of driving and that she was absorbing alcohol. Her roadside performance contradicted her breath test results. | |
| 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.