| Nov 15, 2023 | Case: 23-CT-026975 | Judge Garagozlo |
| Facts: | The defendant was the at fault driver in a side swipe crash. Officers observed the Defendant to have an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, a fixed gaze, and slurred speech. When asked if he had drank any alcohol, the defendant stated, "not much." He then performed various field sobriety tests such as HGN (eye test) and walk and turn. He was subsequently arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test. | |
| Defense: | The firm pointed out to the State that the defendant stated numerous times that he had to urinate, yet the cops wouldn't let him go. The defendant, being made to hold his urine in and not being allowed to go to the bathroom, could have affected his performance on the field sobriety tests. In addition, we pointed out that on tape, the arresting officer was telling another officer that the defendant may need to be transported even though she hadn't even started the dui investigation. Thus, she had it in her mind that she was going to arrest him no matter what. After conversations with the State, they Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
Parks & Braxton, PA: Miami DUI Lawyer | Criminal Defense
CRIMINAL CASE RESULTS
OUR RECENT CRIMINAL DEFENSE VICTORIES
| Nov 15, 2023 | Case: 23-CT-002463 | Judge Culver |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped after he ran a stop sign and nearly struck an officer's patrol car. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he had sluggish movements. His eyes were bloodshot and he had difficulty paying attention. He performed very poorly on field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .245 and .235 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | After negotiations with the state regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Nov 15, 2023 | Case: 23-CT-037571 | Judge Ingram |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped after he was seen driving the wrong way down a one-way street. He also had no lights on. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. He also was unsteady and stumbled. He then performed various field sobriety tests such as the one leg stand and walk and turn. He was arrested for DUI and later blew a .150 and .142 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | After negotiations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Nov 7, 2023 | Case: 23-CT-0004472 | Judge Conrad |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for weaving. The defendant had an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glassy eyes. He also had an unsteady stance. He then performed the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand exercises. He was arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI. | |
| Defense: | The video contradicted the police reports. On tape, the defendant's speech wasn't slurred, he was not unsteady, and appeared responsive and coherent. Prior to trial the State Dropped the defendant's Second DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Nov 7, 2023 | Case: 23-CT-030141 | Judge Musselman |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for having an inoperable tag light. The office noticed an odor of alcohol, fast/mumbled speech, and glassy eyes. He fumbled with his documents, had dry mouth, and stated he had consumed two mixed drinks. He was unsteady when exiting he car, swayed while he stood, and walked very slowly. He performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .130 and .129 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | After conversations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Nov 7, 2023 | Case: 23-CT-033945 | Judge Baker |
| Facts: | The defendant crashed his car into a light pole. When officers arrived, they noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. They also found Bush Light beers in the defendant's car and he swayed while he stood. The defendant refused to perform field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test. | |
| Defense: | When a defendant refuses to perform field sobriety tests, an officer must advise them of the adverse consequences for refusing. For example, the officer must state something like, "I am going to have base my decision to arrest you on what I have observed so far if you refuse." In addition, the officer can state to the defendant that their refusal can be used against them in court. If they do not give any adverse consequences, the refusal will be excluded from evidence. Here, the officer did not give the defendant any adverse consequences. After negotiations short of trial, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Nov 7, 2023 | Case: 23-CT-017777 | Judge Baker |
| Facts: | The defendant was the at fault driver in a sideswipe crash. The defendant left the scene and was later spotted by police standing outside his car on the shoulder of a roadway. They noticed an odor of alcohol, thick tongued/slurred speech, and watery/glassy eyes. He fumbled with his documents and repeated questions. The defendant refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI. He was also charged with leaving the scene of an accident. | |
| Defense: | The firm pointed out numerous issues to the State. First, there was no description given of the driver of the car that had left the scene of the accident (i.e., the defendant). When the defendant was found, he was outside of the car, the rental agreement was not in his name, and a significant amount of time had passed. Thus, there was an issue of identity placing him as the driver at the time of the crash. Also, there was no evidence that the defendant hadn't drank after the crash. Thus, they could not prove he was under the influence at the time of the crash. In addition, the officer did not take any pictures of any damage, never even put the defendant in front of the dash camera prior to arrest, and when the defendant can be heard speaking, his speech was normal. The State Dropped the Defendant's Second DUI and he received no conviction on the leaving the scene charge. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Nov 7, 2023 | Case: 23-CT-005169 | Judge Gutman |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for passing another car in a no passing zone. He had driven west in the eastbound lane after crossing over the double yellow lane divider. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and sluggish reflexes. He dropped his items, swayed while he stood, and also staggered. He performed various roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .133 and .130 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | After several negotiations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Nov 7, 2023 | Case: 23-CT-005779 | Judge Gutman |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for driving with no lights and having an expired tag. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/glassy eyes, and he had difficulty following instructions. The defendant stated he had drank three beers and he also had difficulty following instructions. The defendant refused to perform any field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test. | |
| Defense: | When a defendant refuses to perform field sobriety tests, an officer must advise them of the adverse consequences for refusing. For example, the officer must state something like, "I am going to have base my decision to arrest you on what I have observed so far if you refuse." In addition, the officer can state to the defendant that their refusal can be used against them in court. If they do not give any adverse consequences, the refusal will be excluded from evidence. Here, the officer did not give the defendant any adverse consequences. After negotiations short of trial, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Nov 7, 2023 | Case: 23-CT-036859 | Judge Musselman |
| Facts: | The defendant was unable to maintain a single lane and drove into the bike lane. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes and his movements were slow and lethargic. The defendant appeared clumsy and unsteady, he swayed, and leaned for balance. He refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI. | |
| Defense: | The police reports made the defendant out to be a falling down drunk. The video contradicted the reports as the defendant was not off balance or unsteady in any way. The State Dropped the Defendant's Second DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Nov 6, 2023 | Case: 23-CT-502037 | Judge Paluck |
| Facts: | The police received calls about a reckless driver running cars off the road and stopping in the middle of the road (i.e., the defendant). Police located his car and made contact with him as he was stopped in the middle of the road. They observed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, slurred speech, and he also staggered while walking. The defendant was unsteady and denied drinking any alcohol. He refused to perform any roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test. | |
| Defense: | When a defendant refuses to perform field sobriety tests, an officer must advise them of the adverse consequences for refusing. For example, the officer must state something like, "I am going to have base my decision to arrest you on what I have observed so far if you refuse." In addition , the officer can state to the defendant that their refusal can be used against them in court. If they do not give any adverse consequences, the refusal will be excluded from evidence. Here, the officer did not give the defendant any adverse consequences. After negotiations short of trial, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Nov 6, 2023 | Case: 23-CT-501223 | Judge Gonzalez |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for an inoperative rear brake light and failing to maintain a single lane. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he moved slowly. The defendant also had bloodshot/watery eyes, had difficulty concentrating, and stated he had drank two shots of alcohol. He then performed the HGN (eye test), one leg stand, and walk and turn exercises. The defendant was then arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test. | |
| Defense: | There was no video in the case. The firm pointed out to the State prior to the trial date that the police reports were vague and lacked any specific details regarding the defendant's performance on the field sobriety tests. The State agreed and Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Nov 2, 2023 | Case: AHPFZHE | Judge Croff |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred/thick-tongued speech, and watery/bloodshot eyes. He also had a dazed and blank expression on his face. He then refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test. | |
| Defense: | After conversations with the State regarding the lack of evidence on tape that the defendant's normal faculties were impaired, the State agreed to Drop the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Nov 2, 2023 | Case: AH5O1YE | Judge Lawhorne |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped on his motorcycle for making a right turn on red in violation of a no turn on red sign. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/glassy eyes, and slurred/mumbling speech. He staggered, swayed, and appeared unsteady. The defendant stated he had drank one Bud Light 16 ounce beer. He performed poorly on various field sobriety tests such as the one leg stand, estimation of time, and finger to nose. He was then arrested for DUI. This was the defendant's Fourth DUI. | |
| Defense: | The firm provided the State with various medical records from the defendant. We pointed out that his speech was so slurred because he had suffered from throat cancer and that his why his speech sounded like it did. In addition, he had various back and knee problems causing him to appear very unsteady and off balance. He tried telling the officer all of this on tape. After several conversations the State regarding the evidence and the defendant's medical history, the State Dropped his Fourth DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Oct 31, 2023 | Case: 23-CT-006253 | Judge Conrad |
| Facts: | The defendant was found by police sitting in his running car while stuck on the railroad tracks. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred/rambling speech, and bloodshot/glassy eyes. The defendant performed very poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test. | |
| Defense: | Many observations written in the police reports were over exaggerated as compared to the video tape evidence. After conversations with the State, they agreed and Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Oct 30, 2023 | Case: 23-CT-001824-O | Judge Amy Carter |
| Facts: | The defendant lost control of his car and crashed into multiple parked vehicles. When the officers arrived, they noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. He staggered while walking, appeared very unstable, and would stumble around. There was also feces in his pants. He refused to perform field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .174 and .172 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton filed a pretrial motion to suppress the breath test results. In our motion, we alleged that the defendant was coerced and misled into taking a breath test. The defendant is from Texas and had a Texas driver's License. On tape, at the breath testing facility, the officers were leading him to believe that if he refused a breath test, his license would also be suspended in Texas and that Florida's implied consent law also applied to Texas. That was misinformation. Based on that misinformation, he agreed to take the breath test. In addition, on tape, his speech was not slurred and he never staggered or appeared off balance. The Judge Granted the motion and suppressed (excluded) the breath test results from evidence. The firm then announced ready for trial. A few days before the trial date, the State Agreed to Drop the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Oct 25, 2023 | Case: AGP2DJE | Judge Komninos |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for running a red light. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy/watery eyes, and a flushed face. The defendant exhibited poor ability to understand and he had a sway to his stance. The defendant denied drinking any alcohol. He then performed various roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test. | |
| Defense: | After conversations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Oct 25, 2023 | Case: AGP09EE | Judge Komninos |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, a sway, and he was emotional. The defendant denied drinking but admitted to smoking pot earlier in the evening. He then performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .135 and .134 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | After negotiations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Oct 24, 2023 | Case: 22-CT-502875 | Judge Gagliardi |
| Facts: | The defendant was the at fault driver in a multi vehicle crash. When officers arrived, they noticed an odor of alcohol, unsteadiness on his feet, and he admitted to drinking some beer and cocktails. His speech was mumbled and not understandable and his eyes were red and watery. He refused to perform roadside tests and also refused a breath test. He was then arrested for DUI. | |
| Defense: | The firm filed two pretrial motions. The first was to exclude the refusal to perform field sobriety tests. Under Florida law, an officer must advise a defendant of any adverse consequences for refusing. Here, none were given, and the Judge granted our motion excluding the refusal to perform roadside tests. We also filed a motion to exclude the refusal to provide a breath sample. Under Florida law, a breath test can only be requested after a lawful arrest. Here, the officer requested a breath test prior to arrest. The Judge also granted that motion excluding his breath test refusal. The firm announced ready for trial and the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Oct 24, 2023 | Case: 22-CT-502241 | Judge Gagliardi |
| Facts: | Police were called to an apartment complex regarding the defendant being passed out in his car. The caller also advised there were several beer cans located in the car. When police arrived, they awoke the defendant, identified themselves as police and made verbal requests to exit the car. The defendant responded by saying "go fuck yourselves." Once the defendant was extricated from the car, the officers observed an odor of alcohol, a flushed face, bloodshot eyes, and stuttered/slurred speech. The defendant was then asked to perform field sobriety tests and responded by saying "fuck you, I am a veteran." He was then arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI. | |
| Defense: | The firm filed a pretrial motion to suppress all the evidence based on an illegal search and seizure. In our motion, we alleged that the officers unlawfully ordered the defendant to exit his car without any reasonable suspicion of a crime (i.e. DUI observations). Those DUI observations were not made until after the defendant was unlawfully extricated out of the car for no reason other than sleeping. It should also be noted, this is the same complex where the defendant resides. The Judge granted the motion and threw out all of the evidence. The State Dismissed the defendant's Second DUI. | |
| Result: | The DUI was dismissed. | |
OBTAIN IMMEDIATE LEGAL HELP
To save your license, you must act within 10 days. Contact a partner about your case at (954) 519-2290 or fill out the form here.