| Jun 22, 2023 | Case: 23-CT-001310 | Judge Farr |
| Facts: | The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash and then slid into a tree. Officers noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, pinpoint pupils, and bloodshot eyes. He also had unsteady balance. He refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test. | |
| Defense: | When a defendant refuses to perform field sobriety tests, they must be warned of the adverse consequences. If not, the refusal will be excluded from evidence. Here, the officer never advised the defendant of any consequences. In addition, on tape, the defendant's speech was not slurred and he was only off balance because he twisted his ankle during the crash. After several conversations with the prosecutor, the State 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
| Jun 22, 2023 | Case: 23-CT-000956 | Judge Farr |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for driving the wrong way down a one-way street. The officer noticed an odor alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. The defendant admitted to having drank four glasses of wine and the officer also observed vomit on the driver's side door and on the floorboard of the car. After performing field sobriety tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .139 and .137 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | After negotiations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, they Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jun 21, 2023 | Case: 23-CT-003680 | Judge Moses-Stephens |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for running a red light and speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and he admitted to having one drink. The defendant then performed various field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test. | |
| Defense: | Many observations on the video contradicted the written reports. After negotiations, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jun 21, 2023 | Case: 23-CT-017614 | Judge Musselman |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for weaving all over the road. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred/fast speech, and droopy eyelids. The defendant admitted to having drank a Mike's Hard Lemonade and an open container of said alcohol was found in the car. He also admitted to taking his prescribed narcotic medicines in the morning and was very unsteady. He performed very poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath and urine test. | |
| Defense: | After several conversations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jun 20, 2023 | Case: AGR3M1E | Judge Lawhorne |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for swerving several times all over the lanes of travel. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, watery/glassy eyes, and mumbled/slow speech. He also swayed side to side and admitted to having a drank at the Card Room. After performing several roadside tests, such as the walk and turn and one leg stand, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test. | |
| Defense: | After several conversations with the State regarding the evidence such as the police reports and videotape, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jun 16, 2023 | Case: 22-CT-002525 | Judge Burns |
| Facts: | The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, a flushed face, and glossy eyes. The defendant admitted to having drank one shot of Crown Royal and two White Claws. She was then asked to performed roadside tests to which she refused. She was then arrested for DUI. She later refused a breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI in less than five years. | |
| Defense: | When a defendant refuses to perform field sobriety tests, they must be warned of the adverse consequences. If not, the refusal will be excluded from evidence. Here, the officer never advised the defendant of any consequences. In addition, on tape, the defendant's speech was not slurred and she never appeared off balance or unsteady. After several conversations with the prosecutor, the State Dropped the defendant's Second DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jun 15, 2023 | Case: 23-CT-003229 | Judge Damico |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, red eyes, and he stumbled while walking. He performed poorly on the roadside tests such as the finger to nose, alphabet, and one leg stand. He was then arrested for DUI and later blew a .191 and .175 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | After several conversations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, they Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jun 15, 2023 | Case: 23-CT-013432 | Judge Silverman |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for crossing over lane markers (i.e. weaving). The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, watery/glossy eyes, and slurred speech. His movements were slow and lethargic, he was slow to exit the car, and he swayed while he stood. After refusing to perform field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .173 and .156 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. | |
| Jun 15, 2023 | Case: 22-CT-030828 | Judge Silverman |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/red eyes, and she stated she had drank two Corona beers. She then performed various roadside tests such as the walk and turn, one leg stand, and HGN (eye test). She was then arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test. | |
| Defense: | Prior to trial, the firm pointed out that none of the defendant's normal faculties were impaired. The State agreed and Dropped the DUI down to a Civil Careless Driving infraction. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jun 14, 2023 | Case: 22-CT-014598 | Judge Weis |
| Facts: | The defendant was the at fault driver in a crash whereby he ran a stop sign and hit another car. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, he stumbled, had bloodshot eyes, and appeared unsteady. He refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test. | |
| Defense: | When a defendant refuses to perform field sobriety tests, they must be warned of the adverse consequences. If not, the refusal will be excluded from evidence. Here, the officer never advised the defendant of any consequences. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jun 13, 2023 | Case: 22-CT-014074 | Judge Gutman |
| Facts: | A call went out to police from the defendant's family that she was missing. An officer spotted the defendant in her truck in a parking lot. The keys were in her possession, she was asleep, and the car was off. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol and vomit on the ground. She then was asked to perform roadside tests to which she refused. She was then arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test. | |
| Defense: | The defendant was not in actual physical control as she was sleeping, the car was off, and in a parking lot. She had no "capability " to operate the car. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jun 13, 2023 | Case: 22-CT-014039 | Judge Gutman |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for running a red light. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech and red/glassy eyes. She also stated that she had two drinks. After performing field sobriety tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .137 and .121 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | After several conversations with the state regarding the evidence and the defendant, they Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jun 12, 2023 | Case: 21-CT-007287 | Judge Bennett for Judge Grode - JURY TRIAL |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding, failing to maintain a single lane, jerking the wheel, and flashing his high beams on and off. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he struggled to retrieve his driver's license. He appeared to have a diminished capacity to utilize fine motor skills, almost fell while picking up his wallet he dropped, and used his truck to maintain balance. He also stumbled and fell against the driver's side of the truck. He then performed the walk and turn and one leg stand. On the walk and turn, he never touched heel to toe, used his arms for balance, and stepped off the line. On the one leg stand, he could not complete the exercise past the number four due to severe balance issues. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test. | |
| Defense: | The firm announced ready for trial. At jury trial, we pointed out there was no video and that all the jury had to rely upon was the testimony of one officer. There was no dash camera, no body worn camera, and no other video or audio devices used. The officer testified that there was no policy preventing them from the videotaping. However, neither the arresting officer, nor three backup officers on scene, chose to even pull out a cell phone to video tape the investigation. In addition, the officer wrote two reports. The first report contained nothing about weaving, using high beams, slurred speech, or stumbling and falling. In his second report, written some time later, he added all those observations. He was impeached as to the difference in the reports. The Jury took only ten minutes to find the defendant Non Guilty. | |
| Result: | The Jury found the defendant NOT GUILTY. | |
| Jun 8, 2023 | Case: AGR3YDE | Judge Komninos |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for having no headlights or taillights on after dark. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, disheveled clothing, and his pupils were constricted. His speech was slurred and he used the car for support. He then performed various field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .138 and .136 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. | |
| Jun 8, 2023 | Case: A6SA81E | Judge Komninos |
| Facts: | The defendant was found passed out by fire rescue. They had to assist the defendant out of the vehicle due to his intoxication level. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and thick tongued speech. The defendant admitted to drinking alcohol and stated he was hammered. No field sobriety tests were conducted for the defendant's safety. He later refused a breath test. | |
| Defense: | Since no officer saw the defendant behind the wheel and there was no crash, the arrest was unlawful under Florida Statute 901.15. That statute states that in a misdemeanor case, the officer must observe every element of the crime (i.e. driving or in actual physical control). | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jun 8, 2023 | Case: AGR3RLE | Judge Komninos |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and she appeared unsteady. She also appeared unsure and swayed while she stood. She then performed various roadside tests such as the walk and turn, one leg stand, and HGN (eye test) and was subsequently arrested for DUI. She later refused a breath test. | |
| Defense: | Many of the written observations prior to and during roadside tests were contradicted by the video tape. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jun 7, 2023 | Case: 21-018010MU10A | Judge Gottlieb |
| Facts: | The defendant was involved in a crash. The 911 caller indicated that the defendant struck a parked car, an electric pole as well as two mailboxes. The initial deputy on scene observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot watery eyes as well as slurred speech. In addition, he stated that she was extremely incoherent. The defendant was subsequently taken to the hospital due to the severity of the crash. A DUI task force officer was called to conduct a DUI investigation. The officer arrived at the hospital and made contact with the defendant in one of the trauma rooms. After speaking with the defendant, the officer asked the defendant to perform field sobriety tests within the emergency room. Body-worn video captured the defendant's poor performance on the sobriety tests. The defendant was charged with DUI and subsequently refused a blood test. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton filed a motion to suppress based on the unlawful detention of the defendant within her emergency trauma room. On video you can see the defendant's back to the officer. He enters the room without a warrant or consent from the client and begins his DUI investigation. On the stand the officer was unable to testify approximately how long the defendant was to remain in the hospital. The Supreme Court has indicated that the longer a person remains in the hospital room the greater the expectation of privacy that person would have. We expect doctors and nurses to enter our emergency room. However, we do not expect law enforcement to enter the room. As a result, the Judge agreed that our client had an expectation of privacy within her hospital trauma room. The officer never had permission to enter the room. He certainly never acquired a warrant to enter the room. All of the evidence was excluded from trial. | |
| Result: | The DUI was dismissed. | |
| Jun 7, 2023 | Case: 23-CT-027235 | Judge Garagozlo |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for failure to yield while pulling out of a parking lot. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, a red face, and slurred speech. The defendant stated he had consumed two drinks. He then performed various 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 a breath test. | |
| Defense: | The firm spoke to the prosecutor after watching the video tape. Not one of the defendant's normal faculties were impaired and there was no probable cause to arrest him. The State agreed and Dropped the DUI to a Civil Careless Driving Citation with no points and no conviction. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jun 6, 2023 | Case: 22-CT-016874 | Judge Conrad |
| Facts: | The defendant crashed her car into a guardrail causing damage. When the officer arrived, she was passed out. The officer had to bang on the door and yell at the defendant to get her to wake up. Once awoken, the officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and mumbled/slurred speech. She appeared confused and failed to listen to the officer's commands. She refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused a breath test. | |
| Defense: | One could not hear anything the officer, nor the defendant were saying on tape because the officer had his car radio blasting talk radio. After negotiations regarding the lack of audio evidence, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Jun 6, 2023 | Case: 22-CT-100228 | Judge George |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for accelerating at a high rate of speed and changing lanes from a left turn only to drive north. Officers noticed the defendant to have constricted pupils, a flushed face, and his speech was low and slow. His coordination was poor and the defendant stated he had only taken his prescribed medications, Hydrocodone and Adderall. There was no odor of alcohol. Believing he was impaired by drugs, he was requested to perform field sobriety tests. He performed poorly and was arrested for DUI. He later provided a urine sample which came back positive for the Adderall and also marijuana. At the station, he also submitted to a DRE (drug recognition exam). | |
| Defense: | The DRE officer concluded that the defendant was under the influence of a class of drugs called narcotic analgesics, as well as an amphetamine. Well, the defendant told them he had taken the amphetamine (i.e. Adderall), so that was not a strong conclusion. Hydrocodone is a narcotic analgesic. The defendant tested negative for that so the DRE was wrong. This was pointed out to the State. Also, the officer never concluded marijuana. Marijuana can be in one's system for up to 30 days. The defendant told the cops he had taken the Adderall that morning as prescribed. He told them he had been working on roofs all day and was not impaired. The day of trial call, 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. Contact a partner about your case at (954) 519-2290 or fill out the form here.