| Apr 9, 2019 | Case: 2018-CT-015641 | Judge Gutman |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding and failing to maintain a single lane. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glassy/watery eyes. He had a wristband on from a bar and also had lethargic movements. The defendant stated he had a few drinks and then performed field sobriety tests, which were not video taped. He was arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | Since there was no video, it was pointed out to the State by the firm that the officer did not write any specifics as it related to the roadside tasks. Also, the trooper never even made any attempts to call for a patrol car with a dash camera. 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
| Apr 9, 2019 | Case: 18-CT-504774 | Judge Gonzalez |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding. He had an odor of alcohol, mumbled/slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He stated he had consumed three beers, appeared sleepy, and also had a flushed face. He performed poorly on field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .132 and a .128 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | If evidence is destroyed and it is exculpatory, meaning favorable to the defendant, then the State must be penalized. In this case, although requested several times by the firm, the State nor the police ever turned over the roadside video. It turned out through a computer glitch, it never got uploaded properly. Since the defendant claimed he did better on the roadside tests than the officer wrote, the only evidence to support his claim was that tape. Prior to the firm filing any motions to dismiss for destruction of evidence, the State Dropped the DUI and the defendant received No criminal conviction. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Apr 4, 2019 | Case: 18-004146MU10A | Judge Diaz |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding and swerving within his lane. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he stated he had drank two beers. After performing poorly on the field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .138 and a .133 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton filed a pretrial motion to suppress all the evidence. In our motion, we alleged that the defendant was unlawfully detained without reasonable suspicion of a crime. After the defense cross examined the officer, the court Granted the motion based on a lack of credibility of the officer. Since all of the evidence in the case was thrown out, the State Dismissed the DUI. | |
| Result: | The DUI was dismissed. | |
| Apr 3, 2019 | Case: 18-CT-001321 | Judge Hill |
| Facts: | A caller dialed 911 stating someone was sleeping in a truck on her property. When police arrived, they found the defendant sleeping the pickup truck with engine on. The officers, upon awakening the defendant, observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and she was non responsive to questions. Her eyes were bloodshot and she was very unsteady. Liquor was found in the car and she admitted to consuming a lot of alcohol. After performing poorly on field sobriety tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | The State could not prove that the defendant was in actual physical control because she had no capability to operate the truck while sleeping. The DUI was Dismissed by the State. | |
| Result: | The DUI was dismissed. | |
| Apr 2, 2019 | Case: 2018--CT-505068 | Judge Adams |
| Facts: | A caller dialed the police to report that the defendant almost struck his vehicle and when he confronted him, the defendant appeared intoxicated. When police arrived, they saw the defendant pulling out and they stopped him. They observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he could not even stand up when outside the car. The defendant was unable to maintain his balance and almost fell. He denied drinking and admitted to taking prescribed medicine which were controlled substances. No roadsides were conducted for safety purposes. He was then arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test, however, he provided a urine sample. | |
| Defense: | The FDLE urine sample results contradicted the officer's initial conclusions. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Apr 1, 2019 | Case: 2018-CT-020567 | Judge Hanser |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for failure to maintain a single lane and speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, extremely slurred/mumbled speech, and glassy eyes. He had a difficult time getting out of the vehicle and his reaction time was delayed. The defendant denied drinking alcohol and refused to perform any roadside tests other than HGN (eye test). He was arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | The video contradicted the police reports as to the level of intoxication as written in the reports by the officer. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Mar 26, 2019 | Case: 2018-CT-016920 | Judge Jeske |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for weaving and speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glassy eyes. He had lethargic movements and fumbled with his documents. He also admitted to taking some type of sleeping medication. After performing poorly on the field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. The officer actually believed he was impaired by a chemical and/or controlled substance versus alcohol. The defendant then refused to provide a urine sample. | |
| Defense: | Under Florida Statutes, the State must prove that the defendant was impaired by a specific chemical and/or controlled substance. Here, they could not prove the case due to the fact that the alleged sleeping medication was unknown. Thus, it was unknown by what substance actually impaired the defendant. The State Dismissed the DUI. | |
| Result: | The DUI was dismissed. | |
| Mar 26, 2019 | Case: 2018-CT-017242 | Judge - Senior Judge for Judge Lefler |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding and following too closely. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol and bloodshot eyes. She used the car for balance and had difficulty following instructions. After performing the roadside tests, she was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she blew a .137 and a .135 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | The defendant's performance on the roadside tests contradicted her breath test level. The video clearly showed that the defendant's breath alcohol level was lower at the time of driving. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Mar 26, 2019 | Case: 2018-CT-017200 | Judge Jeske |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for weaving. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. She staggered as she walked and also swayed. After performing the field sobriety tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | The lawfulness of the traffic stop was called into question due to no danger being created by the defendant's driving pattern. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Mar 21, 2019 | Case: 2019-CT-001590 | Judge Booras |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for running a red light and nearly striking numerous curbs. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and a blank stare. He also appeared shaky on his feet and had red/glossy eyes. After performing poorly on the roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .140 and a .137 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | On video, it was clear that there was a language barrier. The officer never even attempted to get an interpreter to translate the roadside instructions into the defendant’s native language. Thus, any mishaps were due to a language barrier, and not impairment by alcohol. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Mar 19, 2019 | Case: 2018-CT-019216 | Judge Farr |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding and weaving. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol and glassy eyes. He admitted to consuming one beer. He then performed the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .119 and a .117 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | The defendant's performance on the roadsides tests on videotape contradicted his breath alcohol level. It clearly showed he was absorbing alcohol and his breath level was lower at the time of driving. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Mar 19, 2019 | Case: 2018-CT-019143 | Judge Farr |
| Facts: | An anonymous caller dialed 911 stating that the defendant was swerving all over the road. When the police stopped him, they observed an odor of alcohol and bloodshot glassy eyes. The defendant was very unsteady outside the car and had a blank look. He refused roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .172 and a .168 in the breath machine. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Mar 19, 2019 | Case: 2018-CT-019294 | Judge Farr |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for weaving. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he admitted to having consumed two drinks. He then performed poorly on the roadside tasks and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .123 and a .124 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | The video contradicted the defendant's breath test results. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Mar 19, 2019 | Case: 18-024778MU10A | Judge Pole |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for running a red light. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, red/glassy eyes, and he fumbled with his paperwork. The police also observed a flushed face. The defendant refused to perform roadside exercises and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. Prior to trial, another video from the officers patrol car surfaced. Not only did it have the alleged driving pattern, but is also showed discrepancies with the officer's reports at the beginning of the traffic stop. On the day of jury trial, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Mar 19, 2019 | Case: 18-024295MU10A | Judge Gottlieb |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for having an inoperable headlight and tag light. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot/glassy eyes. The defendant also appeared unsteady. Numerous controlled substances were also found in the defendant's car. The defendant refused to perform field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, believing he was impaired by drugs and not alcohol, the police requested that he submit to a urine test. That urine test later tested positive for numerous controlled substances. | |
| Defense: | The firm announced ready for trial. Prior to trial, the defense raised several evidentiary violations by the State. For example, the State failed to provide the urine test and expert witness list in a timely manner. On the day of trial, the State dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Mar 18, 2019 | Case: 2018-CT-006548 | Judge Green |
| Facts: | Officers were on an unrelated traffic stop when they observed the defendant pull up to a light on his Harley. The officer wrote that he observed the defendant slow down and seemed unable to control the bike. The defendant also had to place his feet on the ground, "ducked walked the bike, and nearly dropped the bike. Concerned, he told another officer to go stop the defendant to check his well being and see if he was impaired. Once stopped, the officers observed an odor of alcohol, mumbled speech, and bloodshot/watery eyes. He was unsteady and swayed while he stood. He admitted to drinking alcohol and his movements were slow and lethargic. He performed poorly on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .116 and a .111 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton filed a pretrial motion to suppress. In our motion, we alleged that the traffic stop was unlawful. At the motion hearing, we argued that there was no reasonable suspicion of a crime and no factual basis justifying any wellbeing check. The State called both officers to testify. Upon cross examination, the defense got both officers to contradict each other as well as impeach them with the police reports and the video tape of the defendant driving the bike after the light turned green. After hearing the testimony, watching the video, and reading the case law, the Judge Granted the motion and threw out all the evidence. The State subsequently Dismissed the DUI. | |
| Result: | The DUI was dismissed. | |
| Mar 18, 2019 | Case: 2018-CT-000355AX | Judge Singer |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for straddling the center line. Once stopped, the officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he handed the deputy his passport instead of his drivers license. A DUI unit was called who made similar DUI observations. The defendant then performed the roadside tests. For example, on the walk and turn, he stepped off the line and missed heel to toe. On the one leg stand, he put his foot down. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | The firm announced ready for trial. Just prior to trial, the firm pointed out numerous inconsistencies in the officer's reports. For example, he wrote the defendant stepped off the line many times which was in contradiction to the video. Also, the DUI officer concluded that the defendant was intoxicated per his report before he ever even got to the scene and came in contact with the defendant. The State Dropped the DUI on the day of trial. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Mar 14, 2019 | Case: 2018-CT-025559AXXX-XX | Judge Babb |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for weaving, crashing his tire up against a curb, and nearly striking another vehicle. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/watery eyes, and he swayed while he stood. He stated he had drank three IPA beers and also exhibited confusion. After performing the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand exercises, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | There was no video tape or body worn camera. The defendant stated that the officer was exaggerating and not telling the truth so the firm pointed out numerous inconsistencies in the officer's reports and the vague description of the field sobriety tests to the State. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Mar 13, 2019 | Case: 2018-CT-019159 | Judge Mcneil |
| Facts: | The defendant was found passed out in his car. Upon awakening the defendant, the officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and blood shot eyes. The defendant was unsteady and was not making sense. He performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest he refused a breath test. | |
| Defense: | There was no reasonable suspicion of crime justifying ordering the defendant to roll down the windows upon awakening him. Thus, all the evidence would have been thrown out due to that initial illegality. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Mar 7, 2019 | Case: 2018-CM-007918 | Judge Vogel for Judge Lefler |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for driving in the wrong lane of travel on a divided highway. The defendant was observed to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he admitted to having drank a shot and couple of beers. After performing the HGN/VGN (eyes tests), walk and turn, and one leg stand exercises, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test. In a search incident to arrest, marijuana and paraphernalia were found and he was also charged with possession. | |
| Defense: | The video contradicted the officers reports as to the specifics of the field sobriety tests. Prior to any trial, and after negotiations, the State Dropped the DUI and he also received no conviction on the possession charges. | |
| 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.