| Sep 6, 2022 | Case: 21-CT-503888 | Judge Swett |
| Facts: | The defendant was found passed out in a parking garage. Officers saw the defendant's door open and also the passenger door open. The defendant, who was in the driver's seat, and the passenger were practically unconscious. The car was running and officers were yelling at them to wake up, doing sternum rubs, and also checking pulses. EMS was called as well. When the defendant was taken out the car, he tried to go back to sleep on the ground. Officers noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and red eyes. He appeared incoherent on tape and performed poorly on roadside tests. He was arrested for DUI and later blew a .170 and .166 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | The State could not prove that the defendant was in actual physical control because he had no "capability" to operate the vehicle while being passed out. | |
| 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
| Sep 6, 2022 | Case: 21-CT-503413 | Judge Swett |
| Facts: | Officers were called to a 7-11 reference a suspicions person call. When officers arrived, the defendant pulled out of the parking lot and drove up on the curb. The defendant then followed a van too closely and ran a stop sign. He then drove off the roadway and the officer conducted a traffic stop. There was no odor of alcohol, but the officer observed droopy eye lids, bloodshot eyes, and he handed the officer a health insurance card instead of his driver’s license. He also staggered, stumbled, and swayed. He had a dazed look and appeared sleepy. Believing he was impaired by drugs, he then performed various roadside tests and was subsequently arrested for DUI. At the station, he also submitted to a DRE (drug recognition exam). He later provided a urine sample which revealed a positive result for a controlled substance after being tested by FDLE. | |
| Defense: | Issues were presented to the State by the defense as to contradictions between the DRE exam field sobriety tests done at the station versus the roadside tests done as the scene. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Sep 1, 2022 | Case: 22-CT-004440 | Judge Conrad |
| Facts: | The police were called about a suspicious vehicle. When officers arrived, the defendant was parked and asleep in the driver's seat of his truck. The vehicle was off and the keys were on the defendant's lap. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he was making unusual statements. He also had bloodshot eyes and admitted to having drank 4-5 vodka/diet cokes. He refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | The State could not prove that the defendant was in actual physical control of the truck as he had no "capability" to operate the truck while sleeping and the engine being off. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Sep 1, 2022 | Case: 22-CT-003219 | Judge Conrad |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for straddling the lane markers and almost sideswiping a guardrail. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, watery/glassy eyes, and displayed cognitive issues when being spoken too. The defendant first denied drinking then later admitted to having drank beers. He then performed various field sobriety tests such and the HGN (eye test), one leg stand, and walk and turn. He later blew a. 182 and .181 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | After several discussions with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, they Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Aug 31, 2022 | Case: 22-CT-6438 | Judge Conrad |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for driving without lights and also failing to stop at a stop sign. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and she appeared unsteady. She then refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused a breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI and she was also charged with refusing to provide a breath test for the second time. | |
| Defense: | We pointed out to the State that the defendant did not appear unsteady at all on video. In fact, she walked and stood perfectly normal. In addition, her speech sounded normal and she had no issues exiting her car. The State Dropped the defendant's Second DUI and also dismissed her second refusal charge. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Aug 31, 2022 | Case: 22-CT-005947 | Judge Conrad |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for driving westbound in the eastbound lane of travel. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, she admitted to having drank 3 beers, and had red/glassy eyes. She then performed various field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .146 and .140 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | After several negotiations with the State about the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Aug 31, 2022 | Case: 22-CT-5196 | Judge Farr |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for driving 99 mph in a 45 mph zone. He also drove around other cars very closely, almost causing an accident. He was then stopped and ordered out of the car. He was not complying with officers' commands and they handcuffed him. Officers then smelled and odor of alcohol and also noticed bloodshot eyes. He was arrested at that point for reckless driving and resisting an officer without violence. At the jail, he was asked to perform roadside tests to which he refused. A DUI charge was then added. He then refused a breath test. This was the Defendant's Second DUI and also he was charged with a Second Refusal to provide a breath test. | |
| Defense: | An officer must advise a defendant of adverse consequences if they refuse to perform field sobriety tests. Here, the officer didn't comply with the law and gave no adverse consequences. Thus, the defendant's refusal to do roadside tests would have been excluded from evidence. In addition, when the officer read the defendant the implied consent upon requesting a breath test, they read him the wrong implied consent. Here, officer read him the one that applies to boating under the influence cases and not DUI's. Thus, the defendant's refusal to provide a breath sample would have been excluded from evidence. The State Dropped the defendant's Second DUI, Dismissed the second refusal charge, Dismissed the reckless charge, and he received no further penalties on the resisting charge. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Aug 30, 2022 | Case: 20-CT-003489 | Judge Steele |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding and drifting into oncoming lanes. He was then very slow to stop even with lights and sirens. The officer noticed and odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and droopy eye lids. He performed very poorly on roadside tests. For example, on the walk and turn, he stepped off the line and lost his balance during the instructions. On the one leg stand, he used his arms for balance and placed his foot on the ground multiple times. He was arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | The officers were having problems with the breath machine. The defendant never actually refused to take the breath test. The first time he blew, they alleged there were two invalid breath samples. The next time he was going to blow, the machine failed as it reflected RFI (radio frequency interference). The third time he was going to blow, the were two more alleged invalid samples. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Aug 30, 2022 | Case: AFLPCOE | Judge Croff |
| Facts: | The defendant was involved in a traffic crash with another car. She was alleged to have failed to yield to oncoming traffic. When officers arrived, they observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot/glassy eyes. She also had a blank expression on her face. She refused to perform any roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | The firm pointed out to the State that based on the evidence, such as witness statements, police reports, and the physical evidence, it was unclear whether the defendant or the other car was at fault. In addition, on tape, the defendant did not have any blank look and was totally responsive and coherent. Furthermore, her speech sounded normal on tape, and not slurred. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Aug 30, 2022 | Case: AG3AUEE | Judge Lawhorne |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for running a red light. The officer smelled an odor of alcohol, noticed glassy/watery eyes, and the defendant appeared unsteady. The defendant also admitted to having drank beer. After performing several field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .086 and .083 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton pointe out to the State that with the .02 margin of error in the breath machine, the defendant's two breath alcohol results of .086 and .083 were under the legal limit. In addition, English is the defendant's second language. He had a lot of difficulty understanding the officer's instructions during the DUI investigation. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Aug 30, 2022 | Case: AEBMLNE | Judge Lawhorne |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for turning left on a turn right only. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/glassy eyes, and he admitted to having drank a couple of beers. He also had slurred speech and swayed while he stood. He then performed various roadside tests such as the walk and turn, one leg stand, and HGN (eye test). He was arrested for DUI and later blew a .112 and .111 in the breath machine. This was the defendant's Second DUI arrest. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton pointed out numerous inconsistencies between the officer's reports and the DUI video tape. For example, the defendant did not sway and his speech sounded normal. In addition, his performance on the roadside tests on tape was much better than as written in the reports. | |
| Result: | The State Dropped the Defendant's Second DUI. | |
| Aug 19, 2022 | Case: 22-CT-025442 | Judge Peacock |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding and swerving within his lane. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, he admitted to having drank 3 mugs of beers, had watery eyes, and had a flushed face. His attitude varied from polite to cocky to excited to indifferent. He then performed field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .099 and .101 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | Due to the .02 margin of error in the machine, the firm was able to place one of the defendant's breath results under the legal limit of .08. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Aug 19, 2022 | Case: 22-CT-026690 | Judge Peacock |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for crossing over the dotted line multiple times, as well as swerving across lanes of traffic. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and he admitted to having drank two vodka cranberry alcoholic drinks. The defendant performed various roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .167 and .153 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | After conversations with the State about the evidence, they Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Aug 15, 2022 | Case: 22-CT-003890 | Judge Taylor |
| Facts: | The defendant was found by police in his truck blocking lanes of traffic. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy/bloodshot eyes, and rambling/slurred speech. While out of the truck, he swayed, staggered, and also urinated in front of the cop. The defendant refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | After several negotiations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant himself, they Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Aug 12, 2022 | Case: 22-CT-000747 | Judge Hitzemann |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for weaving all over the road and stopping in the middle of the road. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. She was also very unsteady and exhibited mood swings. She performed very poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later blew a . 247 and .241 in the breath machine. This was the defendant's Second DUI. | |
| Defense: | The officer misinformed the defendant by telling her on tape that if she did not do the roadside tests, her license would be suspended. A license suspension only applies to a breath, blood, or urine test, not field sobriety tests. Furthermore, the officer misinformed the defendant of the law by telling her on tape that no matter what she blew in the breath machine, there are no enhancements. Once again a misstatement of the law because any breath alcohol test above a .15 is an enhanced DUI. Realizing that the roadside tests and the breath test would be excluded from evidence, the State Dismissed the defendant's Second DUI. | |
| Result: | The DUI was dismissed. | |
| Aug 11, 2022 | Case: 21-CT-018450 | Judge Bryson |
| Facts: | The defendant was the at fault driver in a three car crash. Officers noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he was sweating profusely. His eyes were red and glassy and he also stumbled. The defendant was asked to perform roadside tests to which he refused. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | When a defendant refuses roadside tests, the officer must advise the defendant of the adverse consequences of his refusal or the refusal will be excluded from evidence. Here, the officer did not give the defendant any adverse consequences as required by law. In addition, on tape the officer was the one who actually stumbled while walking. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Aug 10, 2022 | Case: 22-CT-000309 | Judge Farr |
| Facts: | The defendant was found by police slumped over the wheel in her car blocking the entrance to a residential complex. A child was also in the car. No odor of alcohol was detected, but the officer noticed glassy eyes, very slurred speech, a sway to her stance, and she appeared to keep closing her eyes like she was falling asleep. She also appeared disoriented and confused. Believing she was impaired by drugs, she then performed roadside tests. She performed very poorly and was arrested for DUI. She provided a urine sample which after testing by FDLE revealed numerous controlled substances. | |
| Defense: | During negotiations with the State, we pointed out that circumstances surrounding the initial contact with the defendant were an unlawful search and seizure. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Aug 10, 2022 | Case: 22-CT-001299 | Judge Farr |
| Facts: | The defendant crashed his car into a tree and entered back on the road. His vehicle then skid into a Ford truck which then crashed through a garage door. Officers noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and stated he had drank an old fashioned cocktail. After performing various field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | The firm pointed out to the State that on video the officer had the defendant perform the walk and turn and one leg stand in a windstorm. The wind was so strong that one could see things blowing all over. Due to the lack of fairness shown to the defendant considering the roadside test conditions, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Aug 10, 2022 | Case: 22-CT-003255 | Judge Jeske |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding and weaving. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and a flushed face. He also had clumsy movements, swayed, and was unsteady on his feet. After performing various field sobriety tests such as the walk and turn and one leg stand, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .114 and .111 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | Although the defendant blew just over the legal limit, his video performance of the field sobriety tests showed he may have been lower than .08 at the time of driving. In other words, he was on the rise and absorbing alcohol at the time he blew into the machine. Due to the conflict, 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.