| Apr 27, 2016 | Case: 15-032125MU10A | Judge Robinson |
| Facts: | The defendant almost caused a head on collision by driving on the wrong side of the road. As the other car veered away, the defendant's car hit the rear bumper panel of the other driver's car. When officers arrived, the defendant had an odor of alcohol, mumbled speech, and red eyes. The defendant's speech was not understandable. He was very unsteady, and could not focus on simple questions. He performed very poorly on the roadside tasks and showed several indicators of impairment. He was then arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .209 and .207 in the breath machine (almost three times the legal limit). | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton took sworn pretrial depositions of the officers involved in the case. Based on the answers given in their depositions, the firm developed a motion to suppress the lawfulness of the arrest based on improper police procedure. The firm then met with State and they agreed with the issue based on case law provided to them. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
Parks & Braxton, PA: Miami DUI Lawyer | Criminal Defense
CRIMINAL CASE RESULTS
OUR RECENT CRIMINAL DEFENSE VICTORIES
| Apr 27, 2016 | Case: 15-CT-504769, 70 | Judge Swett |
| Facts: | The defendant crashed her car into a area full of trees. When the police arrived, the defendant was unresponsive and passed out. EMS was also on scene to see if the defendant required medical attention. Upon awakening the defendant who was very unresponsive, the officers observed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant was unsteady on her feet once outside the vehicle. The defendant refused to perform the roadside tasks even after being made aware of the adverse consequences. She was then arrested for DUI and subsequently refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton had made several requests, along with the prosecutor, to obtain a video tape of the DUI investigation. Since the police were ignoring all requests, there was a potential discovery violation. Prior to any evidentiary hearings on the issue, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Apr 25, 2016 | Case: 2015-CT-011030 | Judge Bell |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol and red blood shot eyes. The defendant admitted to consuming two glasses of wine. Prior to roadside tests being administered, the defendant almost fell and stumbled onto the grass. According to the officer, she failed all the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she blew a .113 and .115 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton had pretrial discussions with the State. We pointed out that the defendant was from another country, had a foreign driver's license, and her English was not good. No interpreter was ever called to the scene or the station. Thus, the defendant did not understand any instructions on the roadside tests, nor did she understand "implied consent" being read to her prior taking the breath test on tape. The State dropped the DUI and the defendant received no criminal conviction. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Apr 15, 2016 | Case: 15-004032MU10A | Judge Brown |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for having an obscured tag and revving his engine. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. The defendant admitted to drinking beer and was off balance on his feet. The defendant refused to perform the roadside tasks and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton filed a pretrial motion to suppress the evidence. In our motion, we alleged that the officer did not have probable cause to arrest the defendant. The videotape of the DUI investigation at the scene contradicted what was written in the police reports regarding the defendant's level of impairment. Prior to the motion being heard, the State watched the videotape and Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Apr 15, 2016 | Case: 2013-MM-013483 | Judge Hanser |
| Facts: | An anonymous person called the police stating they noticed the defendant to be passed out in his car in their neighborhood. When police arrived, they found the defendant's car parked against the curb, the defendant was slumped over, and drooling from the mouth. The vehicle was in park with the keys in the ignition. Upon awakening the defendant, the officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and a red/flushed face. On video, the defendant could hardly stand and his speech was not even understandable. The defendant attempted the roadside exercises but did not complete them. He was then arrested for DUI. The police also found marijuana in the car in a search incident to arrest. After his arrest, he blew a .201 and .198 in the breath machine. This was the defendant's Third DUI. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton were involved in pretrial litigation to try to exclude the breath test results based on improper maintenance procedures conducted by FDLE on this particular machine. Prior to the motion being heard, the State agreed with the issue and Dropped the DUI. The defendant also received no criminal conviction for he marijuana charge. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Apr 13, 2016 | Case: 2015-CT-023325 | Judge Gabbard |
| Facts: | The defendant was the at fault driver in a two car crash. When the officer arrived on scene, he noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol and glassy eyes. The defendant appeared off balance and unsteady while talking to the officer. The defendant performed poorly on the roadside tests which included the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand. He exhibited several signs of impairment. There was no video tape of the DUI investigation. He was then arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .091 and .091 in the breath machine. This was the defendant's Third DUI. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton had discussions with the State prior to trial. We pointed out that the air bags had deployed and hit the defendant in the face. Thus, any impairment could have been as easily attributed to the injuries from the airbag versus alcohol. Also, there is margin of error on the breath machine in which we were able to place the defendant under the legal limit. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Apr 12, 2016 | Case: 2015-CT-024375 | Judge Jeske |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for driving with no head lights. Once stopped, the officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glassy/watery eyes. The defendant performed the roadside tests on video tape. According to the officer, she failed and was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton had pretrial discussions with the State. We pointed out that on tape, the officer followed her as she was driving without head lights for over a mile without stopping her on a residential street. The officer let the defendant drive onto the highway with no head lights. Furthermore, although the officer could have stopped her and done roadsides on a residential street, he chose to have her do them ten feet from cars and trucks on an interstate highway. We pointed out that this, her fear of being killed by a car or truck, could have contributed to her alleged poor performance. The State agreed after watching the whole video tape. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Apr 12, 2016 | Case: 13-017965MM10A | Judge Evans |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for making a left turn on a red light. The initial officer observed a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, flushed face and slurred speech. Additionally, the officer located an open container in the center console. A DUI officer subsequently arrived on scene. In addition to the above observations, the DUI officer stated that the defendant was extremely lethargic. After performing the walk and turn, one leg stand and HGN (eye test), the defendant was arrested for DUI. | |
| Defense: | Because of the inconsistency between the reports and the video, the State was unable to proceed. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Apr 11, 2016 | Case: 0506-XFE | Judge Altfield |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer who stopped the defendant, observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. He then called for a DUI unit, who arrived and made similar observations. That officer then requested the defendant to perform the field sobriety tests. The defendant performed the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand tests. He was then arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI within a five year period. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. On the morning of trial, the firm pointed out to the State that the DUI officer did not write one detail about the defendant's performance on the roadside tests. All he did was check off the boxes on the DUI test report. Upon questioning the officer prior to trial, he could not remember one specific. The State then Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Apr 5, 2016 | Case: 15-009347MU10A | Judge Pole |
| Facts: | The defendant was observed at a light screeching his tires as he proceeded forward. As he approached a second light, again the defendant proceeded forward while screeching and spinning his tires. Next, the officer observed the defendant failing to maintain a single lane. The defendant was subsequently stopped. As the officer spoke with the defendant, he detected a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot watery eyes, as well as slurred speech. He subsequently acknowledged coming from a bar and consuming a few beers. The defendant performed the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, one leg stand as well as the finger to nose tests. He was arrested for DUI and blew a .136 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton filed a motion to suppress based on an improper stop. Specifically, screeching tires is not a violation of law. In addition, failure to maintain a single lane is only a violation if other traffic is affected. The officer testified that traffic could have been affected but could not recall if it was. In addition, he could not articulate how far the defendant veered or how many tires actually crossed over the line. The motion was granted and all of the evidence including the breath test was excluded. | |
| Result: | The DUI was dismissed. | |
| Mar 31, 2016 | Case: 2015-CT-010642 | Judge Bell |
| Facts: | The defendant was the at fault driver in a two car rear end crash. When the officer arrived, he observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and a "drunk stare." The defendant was fumbling with his documents and almost dropped his phone. According to the officer, the defendant failed the field sobriety tests which were video taped and he was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, the defendant blew a .163 and .160 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State, that on tape, the defendant's performance on the roadside tests were much better than as described in the police reports. Also, the defendant's breath test level was contradicted by his performance on the field sobriety tests, thus, it was clear his breath alcohol level may have been lower at the time of driving. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Mar 29, 2016 | Case: 12-003426MM10A | Judge Lerner-Wren |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding. Upon approaching the vehicle, the officer observed a strong odor of marijuana. The defendant consented to a search which revealed burnt marijuana as well as a pipe. Upon exiting the vehicle the defendant allegedly had a "drunk-like" walk. The officer observed a strong odor of alcohol as well as slurred speech and bloodshot eyes. The defendant acknowledged that she had three beers and was driving home. She subsequently performed several field sobriety tests on video and was arrested for DUI as well as possession of cannabis and paraphernalia. At the breath alcohol testing facility she blew a .115. | |
| Defense: | Upon a review of the video, the defendant's performance contradicted the investing officer's police report. Specifically, on the one leg stand the defendant was able to maintain her balance for 52 seconds. On the walk and turn test despite a stumble on the turn, she was able to walk in a straight line. As such, Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. The DUI was dropped and the defendant was not convicted of any charges. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Mar 15, 2016 | Case: 2015-CT-009578-A-O | Judge Freeman |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for running a red light. When officers approached the defendant after he pulled into a gas station, they noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and and glassy eyes. The defendant was then asked to step out of the car as the officers wanted to conduct a DUI investigation. The defendant refused several commands to get out of the car and after a couple of minutes was forcibly removed from the vehicle. Once removed, the defendant was immediately cuffed and arrested. He was then taken to the breath testing facility where he refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI within five years. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton had gotten a cell phone video from the client of the incident at the car. This cell phone video showed the cops at the defendant's car trying to get him out of the car. It also showed they never mentioned any DUI investigation, versus what was in the reports. Also, once they got him out of the car he was immediately cuffed. No roadside tests were ever even offered to the defendant on scene or at the station. The officers were aware the defendant was filming them. The firm turned the cell phone video over the prosecutor to prove there was no DUI investigation ever even attempted. Thus, there was a lack of evidence of impairment and contradictions between the officer's written version and cell phone video. The State watched the cell phone video and Dismissed the DUI. | |
| Result: | The DUI was dismissed. | |
| Mar 9, 2016 | Case: 2015-CT-023628 | Judge Koons |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for driving too slow and weaving. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, mumbled speech, and bloodshot eyes. The defendant swayed while standing and admitting to having consumed two beers. According to the officer, the defendant failed the roadside tests which were video taped. The defendant was then arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .207 and .195 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton had numerous pretrial discussions with the State Attorney's Office over several months regarding issues about the case. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Feb 26, 2016 | Case: 2015-CT-022206 | Judge GABBARD |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding. The defendant was slow to react to the police lights in pulling over. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, flushed face, and watery eyes. The defendant was requested by the officer to perform the roadside tests. According to the officer, he failed and was arrested for DUI. There was no video at the scene. After his arrest for DUI, the defendant admitted to drinking beer, feeling the effects of the alcohol, and smoking marijuana earlier that day. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton had pretrial discussions with the prosecutor. We not only pointed out how poorly written and vague the police reports were, but also that there were numerous contradictory statements throughout the reports. With no video tape, the officers' credibility was called into serious question prior to trial. | |
| Result: | The DUI was dismissed. | |
| Feb 25, 2016 | Case: 14-023963MU10A | Judge Solomon |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding and running a red light. The driving pattern, as well as the subsequent DUI investigation, was captured on video. Upon stopping the defendant, the officer observed a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot watery eyes as well as slurred speech. During a conversation with the defendant, he admitted to the officer that he was taking anti-anxiety medication as well as drinking. During the investigation, the defendant performed and subsequently failed the one leg stand, walk and turn and the finger to nose tests. The defendant was arrested for DUI and he blew a .178 and a .170 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton took depositions (sworn statements) of all of the officers involved. The arresting officer acknowledged that he would have to rely on his report and was unable to recall specific details concerning the circumstances surrounding the investigation. We filed a motion to exclude the testimony of the arresting officer based on a lack of any independent recollection of the investigation. In addition, a motion to suppress the arrest for lack of probable cause was filed. The State conceded the motion and dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Feb 23, 2016 | Case: 2015-CT-039322-AXXX-XX | Judge ATKIN |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding and weaving. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, a pale face, and clumsy dexterity. The defendant was slow to exit the car and swayed while standing outside the vehicle. The defendant performed the roadside tests on video tape. He showed signs of impairment and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .156 and .156 in the breath machine. The defendant was also video taped at the police station blowing into the machine and speaking with the officers. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State that there was an error on the breath test print out sheet with the defendant's results due to a control test being out of the accepted range. The officers are on video tape telling the defendant he needed to blow again due to an error, but would not tell him what the error was on the machine. The defendant can be heard over and over asking for an explanation. The defendant then refused to give any more samples in that same machine. The State, after watching the video at the station and hearing the conversation between the officers and the defendant, agreed to Drop the DUI just prior to trial. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Feb 22, 2016 | Case: 0436-XFE | Judge WOLFSON |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for having an expired tag. Once stopped, the officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant failed the roadside tests. For example, on the walk and turn, she did not touch heel to toe and took an incorrect number of steps. On the one leg stand, she swayed, raised her arms for balance, and put her foot down. After her arrest, she blew a .101 and .094 in the breath machine. This was the defendant's Second DUI. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. On the morning of trial, the firm had the opportunity to talk to the arresting officer. The officer contradicted himself not only by stating opposite facts as to what was written in his report, but also by adding several facts to the case that were not written in his very vague reports. Based on that pretrial conversation, the State Dropped the DUI due to the officer's credibility being called into question. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Feb 17, 2016 | Case: 15-003751CTAXMX | Judge ROBERTS |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped by the police after he was seen driving out of an enclosed area which had barricades and posted signs stating to not enter. The area was closed off due to an art festival. The defendant was stopped at almost 3 a.m.. Once stopped, the officer noticed an odor of alcohol, flushed face, mumbled speech, and he was swaying. The defendant admitted to having a few drinks. On video, the defendant showed several signs of impairment and he was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .228 and .224 in the breath machine. This was the defendant's Second DUI. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton filed a pretrial motion to suppress all the evidence for an unlawful traffic stop. In our motion, we alleged there was no probable cause to believe the defendant committed any traffic infractions, nor was there any reasonable suspicion of a crime as he was "coming out of the area," not driving into the enclosed area in disregard of any signs. On the day of the motion hearing, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Feb 12, 2016 | Case: 2015-CT-001343-E | Judge Starr |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for speeding, swerving, and almost hitting a curb. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, red eyes, and slurred speech. When asked if he had been drinking by the officer, the defendant responded by telling the officer he had consumed 4 beers, 1 shot, and 1 mixed drink. According to the officer, the defendant admitted to being drunk. The defendant performed the field sobriety tests and showed several signs of impairment. He was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton had questioned the officers prior to a trial date being set. The officers who were on scene contradicted themselves. Since there was no video at the scene, their credibility was called into question. Also, the defendant appeared sober on video at the breath testing facility which contradicted the officers account of what happened at the scene of the arrest. | |
| 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.