| May 20, 2019 | Case: 2019-MM-005118 | Judge Booras |
| Facts: | Florida fish and wild life law enforcement boarded the defendant's boat for a safety inspection. They observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol and watery/bloodshot eyes. He was then asked to perform field sobriety tests. He performed the HGN (Eye test), palm pat, finger to nose, and hand coordination exercises. He was then arrested for Boating under the influence. After his arrest, he refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | The officer did not write any specifics as they related to the roadside tasks. Also, one's eyes can be watery and bloodshot after being in the sun and on the sea water. In addition, none of the defendant's normal faculties were impaired. The firm convinced the State to then Dismiss the Boating under the influence charge. | |
| Result: | The DUI was dismissed. | |
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
| May 14, 2019 | Case: 2018-CT-018939 | Judge Dominguez for Lefler |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for driving the wrong way on the highway causing others to avoid a collision. The defendant appeared disoriented and had glassy eyes. When the defendant spoke, he did not make any sense and also had difficulty following directions. He admitted to taking several unknown prescription medications. There was no odor of alcohol, but the officer suspected impairment by drugs. After performing poorly on the field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused both a breath and urine test. | |
| Defense: | Prior to trial, the firm filed a motion for statement of particulars in order to force the State to disclose, as requited by the DUI Statute, by which "specific" drug they are alleging that the defendant was impaired by. In order to convict someone of DUI in Florida, the State the must prove that the defendant was impaired by alcohol and/or a "specific" chemical and/or controlled substance. Here, the State was not able to name the specific substance that was impairing the defendant. The DUI was dropped and he received no conviction on his record. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| May 9, 2019 | Case: 2018-MM-014085 | Judge Conrad |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for swerving and almost colliding with a semi truck. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and he handed them a credit card instead of his drivers license. He also had slurred speech and performed poorly on the field sobriety tests. He was arrested for DUI. In a search incident to arrest for the DUI, officers also found marijuana and drug paraphernalia. | |
| Defense: | It was pointed out to the state that the officer was unsure what was allegedly impairing the defendant. On tape, when asked by the defendant what he was under the influence of, the officer stated "probably " alcohol. If the arresting officer is unsure, then how can the case be proven beyond a reasonable doubt in court. The state dropped the DUI and also dismissed both drug charges. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| May 8, 2019 | Case: 2019-CT-013435 | Judge Atkin |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for weaving and speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, glossy/watery eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant stated he had drank 3 to 4 beers, was slow exiting the vehicle, and swayed wile he stood. He then performed the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand exercises. He was then arrested for DUI and later blew a. 190 and a .175 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | The lawfulness of the traffic stop was called into question since it was unclear all of the specifics of distance and time of the alleged driving pattern. The State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| May 2, 2019 | Case: A2FJW9P | Judge Sosa-Bruzon |
| Facts: | The defendant was passed out in his car in the middle of an intersection. Upon awakening the defendant, his car rolled forward and crashed. The officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He had vomit on him and was extremely unsteady. He admitted to having consumed beers and performed very poorly on the roadside tasks. He was arrested for DUI and later blew a .198, and a .180 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | The firm pointed out to the State, that on the body worn cameras, the defendant was improperly coerced into taking the breath test. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Apr 30, 2019 | Case: 2018-CT-058468 | Judge Babb |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for failing to maintain a single lane and having an inoperable tail light. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slow/slurred speech, and bloodshot/glassy eyes. She also staggered and swayed. After performing the field sobriety tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | The defendant attempted to blow into the machine numerous times and never actually refused. However, there were numerous problems with the machine each time she attempted to provide a sample. Due to the machine having problems, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Apr 30, 2019 | Case: 2018-CT-019322 | Judge Farr |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for running a stop sign. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, red/glassy eyes, and mumbled speech. According to the officer, he failed all the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. This was the defendant's Third DUI. | |
| Defense: | Prior to trial, it was pointed out to the State that the officer's reports contradicted each other. For example on one page, the officer wrote that the defendant was riding a red bike, however, he was actually driving a blue jeep. On another page, he stated that he observed nystagmus in the defendant's eyes prior to 45 degrees during the HGN (eye tests). Yet, on another page, he did not observe any nystagmus. Also, the officer tried to make the defendant out to be a falling down drunk which was contradicted by the videotape. The State Dropped the defendant's Third DUI just prior to trial. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Apr 30, 2019 | Case: 2018-CT-048511 | Judge Atkin |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding and weaving. Upon contact, the officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and a dry mouth. The defendant was slow exiting the vehicle, slow walking, and swayed while he stood. The defendant performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | The firm pointed out that the defendant had inner ear surgery which caused balance issues. He also had a traumatic brain injury which caused cognitive and balance issues. Thus, we pointed out that there was reasonable doubt as to whether the impairment was due to his injuries versus alcohol. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Apr 30, 2019 | Case: 2019-CT-001073 | Judge Epperson |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped by police after he was stopped in the middle of the road obstructing traffic. The defendant was asked to step out the vehicle. Once out, the officer observed glassy/red/bloodshot eyes, he swayed, and also staggered. The defendant "weaved" while he walked and continuously licked his lips. Believing he was impaired by some type of chemical and/or controlled substance, he was asked to perform field sobriety tests. According to the officer, he failed and was arrested for DUI . After his arrest, he submitted to a DRE (drug recognition exam) and a urine tests. | |
| Defense: | The officer's credibility as a DRE officer was called into question. On one hand, he determined that the defendant was under the influence of a CNS depressant, and on the other hand, he determined he was impaired by a CNS stimulant. The two things are opposites, so his conclusions did not make sense. In addition, the urine test was also inconsistent with his DRE conclusions. The DUI was Dismissed. | |
| Result: | The DUI was dismissed. | |
| Apr 30, 2019 | Case: 2018-MM-057925 | Judge Jacobus |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for weaving in and out of traffic and accelerating at a high rate of speed. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, stuttering speech, and he admitted to having had consumed one drink. After refusing the field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. | |
| Defense: | The defendant's refusal to perform field sobriety tests was inadmissible because the officer had not advised the defendant of any adverse consequences for refusing as required by Florida case law. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Apr 30, 2019 | Case: 2018-CT-051419 | Judge Jacobus |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and unsure/clumsy movements. His pupils were slightly dilated, speech was slow at times, and he admitted to having drank beer. According to the officer, he performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .087 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and unsure/clumsy movements. His pupils were slightly dilated, speech was slow at times, and he admitted to having drank beer. According to the officer, he performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .087 in the breath machine. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Apr 26, 2019 | Case: 2018-CT-019920 | Judge Cunningham |
| Facts: | The defendant was involved in a traffic crash. Officers observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he was acting erratic. He admitted to having drank 4 beers. He performed very poorly on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .199 and a .196 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | Through an independent investigation by the firm, we were able to establish that the defendant did not cause and/or contribute to the crash as required by law to prove DUI with a crash. The State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Apr 23, 2019 | Case: 2019-CT-001500 | Judge Hanser |
| Facts: | Officers were called to a parking garage where the defendant's vehicle was causing a disturbance by "drifting." Officers stopped the vehicle and noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and red eyes. He was sweating profusely, uneasy on his feet, and belligerent. The defendant had a Cold & Frosty 6-pack of beer in his vehicle. The defendant refused to perform field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | In order to stop a vehicle, there must be probable cause to believe an infraction occurred or reasonable suspicion of a crime. Here, the officer lacked both and the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Apr 22, 2019 | Case: 2019-CT-012045 | Judge Koenig |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for straddling the lane markers. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glossy/watery eyes. The defendant had poor dexterity, swayed, and admitted to drinking beer. After performing the field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. | |
| Defense: | During the HGN (eye test), an angle of onset in the defendant's eyes was not observed prior to 45 degrees. Under Tharpes formula, this would indicate that the defendant had a breath alcohol level under the legal limit at the "time of driving." | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Apr 22, 2019 | Case: 2019-CT-056456 | Judge Koenig |
| Facts: | The officer was on foot patrol and noticed the defendant in the parking lot of a bar having difficulty walking in a straight line holding a key in his hand. The defendant tried to conceal himself then ducked behind a fence. The officer observed the defendant open the driver’s door and sit in the driver's seat. The officer then made contact and observed an odor of alcohol, mumbling speech, and glassy eyes. According to the officer, he performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .215 and a .210 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | An officer must have reasonable suspicion of a crime in order to lawfully detain a person. Here, there were legally insufficient specific articulable facts justifying the officer to detain the defendant as he initially sat down in his seat. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Apr 18, 2019 | Case: A9EVGYE | Judge Riba |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol and bloodshot eyes. He also had slurred speech, a flushed face, and fumbled with his documents. He was unsteady, swayed, and staggered while outside the car. The defendant refused to perform all of the roadside tasks other than HGN (eye test), and was then arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | The video contradicted the police reports and this was brought to the State's attention by the firm. On tape, the defendant's speech was normal and he was not off balance or unsteady. The State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Apr 16, 2019 | Case: 2017-CT-012171 | Judge Hanser |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for driving all over the road and driving into oncoming traffic. The defendant had slow/slurred speech, slow movements, and stumbled a few times. The officer did not smell an odor of alcohol, however, the defendant stated that he had taken Methadone earlier in the day. The defendant performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. Believing that the defendant was impaired by drugs, he was asked for a urine test to which he refused. This was the defendant's Second DUI. | |
| Defense: | Prior to trial, the firm took pretrial depositions of the arresting officer and the State's expert toxicologist. After questioning the two witnesses, the defense established that neither could give an opinion that the defendant was actually impaired by the Methadone. Under Florida law, the State cannot just prove a person is just impaired, it has to be by either alcohol, and/or "specific" chemical and/or "specific" controlled substance. The State Dropped the defendant's Second DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Apr 15, 2019 | Case: 2019-CT-015534 | Judge Koenig |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for weaving. Upon contact, the officer observed an odor of alcohol, a flushed face, and bloodshot eyes. The defendant admitted to having consumed numerous vodkas. He swayed while he stood and performed poorly on the roadside tests. He was arrested for DUI and subsequently blew a .123 and a .116 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | Many of the observations written by the officer in his reports were contradicted by the video tape. The State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Apr 11, 2019 | Case: 2019-CT-011341 | Judge Jacobus |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding and a broken license plate light. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot/glassy eyes. The defendant admitted to having come from a bar where he had drank 2-3 drinks. After performing the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand exercises, he was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .157 and a .149 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | The video contradicted the breath results. In otherwise, his performance on the field sobriety tests clearly showed that his breath alcohol results may have been under the legal limit at the time of driving. It is the theory of absorption and elimination of alcohol through the body. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Apr 10, 2019 | Case: 0250-XEY | Judge Barket |
| Facts: | The defendant was detained by police after he left the scene of an accident for which he was at fault. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and lethargic movements. He needed to use the car for balance and support, and he also swayed. He performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .167 and a .162 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | The State could not prove that the defendant was the driver at the time of crash as he was outside the car walking around when police arrived. The State Dropped the DUI. | |
| 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.