Parks & Braxton, PA: Miami DUI Lawyer | Criminal Defense | DUI Wins

OUR RECENT DUI VICTORIES

The following is a list of the firm’s most recent DUI wins. Parks & Braxton provides the case number, the judge’s name, as well as the date the DUI was won for authenticity purposes.

Jul 30, 2024	Case: 24-CT-001711	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving and hitting a curb causing the tire to go flat. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and slurred speech. She had a noticeable sway, admitted to drinking at a nearby bar, and had difficulty providing her documents. She then performed the walk and turn, one leg stand, and HGN (eye test) exercises. She was arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test.
Defense:	Many observations written in the police reports were contradicted by the video tape. After conversations with the State, they Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 30, 2024	Case: 24-CT-003981	Judge Rich
Facts:	The defendant was stopped after he was observed by police sitting at a green light and not moving for several moments. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and watery/glossy eyes. While outside of the car, he was unsteady on his feet. The defendant refused to perform any field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test.
Defense:	On video, the defendant was not sitting at a light for minutes. It was actually 14 seconds. Also, his speech was not slurred and he was not unsteady. Thus, the officer was not truthful in her reports and her credibility was called into question.
Result:	The State Dropped the DUI and he received no probation or any penalties other than court costs.

Jul 30, 2024	Case: 24-CM-003133	Judge Rich
Facts:	The defendant was stopped after he was observed weaving all over the road. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, red/watery eyes, he fumbled with his documents, and he appeared unsteady. The Officer noticed a vegetative like substance on the defendant's person that appeared to be marijuana. He refused to perform any field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a urine test.
Defense:	Officers believed he was impaired by drugs and not alcohol. Under Florida law, to prove DUI, the State must prove what the defendant was impaired by. Under the DUI statute 316.193, it must be either alcohol, a specific chemical, or specific controlled substance and/or combination of the latter. Here, there was no odor of alcohol, no mention of drugs, no alcohol or drugs found. Thus, the State could not prove by what specific substance was impairing the defendant. One cannot just be impaired by "anything.” The cops never sent any of the "vegetative" substances off to the lab for testing.
Result:	The DUI was Dismissed.

Jul 30, 2024	Case: 23-001244MU10A	Judge Lerner-Wren
Facts:	The defendant was involved in a multiple vehicle crash. When the officers arrived she was still seated behind the wheel of the vehicle. The other individuals in the crash gave statements identifying the defendant as the "at fault" driver in the crash. On video, the defendant was unable to locate her driver's license. Her speech was extremely slurred. She clearly looked and acted impaired. The report indicated that the defendant was under the influence of alcohol or some type of narcotic or medication. The defendant was taken to the hospital and provided both a urine as well as a blood test. The defendant was charged with DUI Property Damage.
Defense:	The urine and blood tests were taken at the request of medical staff, and not law enforcement. The prosecutors made several attempts to acquire the results of the tests. Each time counsel objected based on HIPPA privacy rights. Eventually, the case was set for trial.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 30, 2024	Case: 24-CM-003133	Judge Rich
Facts:	The defendant was stopped after he was observed weaving all over the road. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, red/watery eyes, he fumbled with his documents, and he appeared unsteady. The Officer noticed a vegetative like substance on the defendant's person that appeared to be marijuana. He refused to perform any field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a urine test.
Defense:	Officers believed he was impaired by drugs and not alcohol. Under Florida law, to prove DUI, the State must prove what the defendant was impaired by. Under the DUI statute 316.193, it must be either alcohol, a specific chemical, or specific controlled substance and/or combination of the latter. Here, there was no odor of alcohol, no mention of drugs, no alcohol or drugs found. Thus, the State could not prove by what specific substance was impairing the defendant. One cannot just be impaired by "anything.” The cops never sent any of the "vegetative" substances off to the lab for testing.
Result:	The DUI was Dismissed.

Jul 30, 2024	Case: 24-CT-004316	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for swerving, driving too slowly, swerving, and crossing over lane lines multiple times. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, lethargic appearance, and slurred speech. He stated he had consumed one drink. He then performed poorly on field sobriety tests such and the walk and turn and one leg stand. He was arrested for DUI and later blew a .172 and .171 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.

Jul 30, 2024	Case: 24-CT-003614	Judge Rich
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, he appeared jittery, overtalkative, and sweaty. He also spoke usually fast and was unable to stand still. He then performed various roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test.
Defense:	On tape, none of the defendant's normal faculties were impaired. Based on his performance on the roadside tests, there was a lack of probable cause to arrest him. The State agreed and Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 30, 2024	Case: 24-CT-001711	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving and hitting a curb causing the tire to go flat. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and slurred speech. She had a noticeable sway, admitted to drinking at a nearby bar, and had difficulty providing her documents. She then performed the walk and turn, one leg stand, and HGN (eye test) exercises. She was arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test.
Defense:	Many observations written in the police reports were contradicted by the video tape. After conversations with the State, they Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 30, 2024	Case: 24-CT-002163	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was found passed out/unconscious at a green light in his running car. Officers awoke the defendant and noticed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and slow/lethargic movements. The defendant swayed while he stood and admitted to having drank martinis. He performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test.
Defense:	After negotiations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 30, 2024	Case: 24-CT-003981	Judge Rich
Facts:	The defendant was stopped after he was observed by police sitting at a green light and not moving for several moments. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and watery/glossy eyes. While outside of the car, he was unsteady on his feet. The defendant refused to perform any field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test.
Defense:	On video, the defendant was not sitting at a light for minutes. It was actually 14 seconds. Also, his speech was not slurred and he was not unsteady. Thus, the officer was not truthful in her reports and her credibility was called into question.
Result:	The State Dropped the DUI and he received no probation or any penalties other than court costs.

Jul 30, 2024	Case: 24-CT-001461	Judge Buie
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for failing to yield and almost causing a collision. He also was weaving and straddling lane markers. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he seemed confused. His speech was slurred and he was unsteady. He refused to perform roadside tests, other than the HGN (eye test), and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath 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.

Jul 30, 2024	Case: 23-001244MU10A	Judge Lerner-Wren
Facts:	The defendant was involved in a multiple vehicle crash. When the officers arrived she was still seated behind the wheel of the vehicle. The other individuals in the crash gave statements identifying the defendant as the "at fault" driver in the crash. On video, the defendant was unable to locate her driver's license. Her speech was extremely slurred. She clearly looked and acted impaired. The report indicated that the defendant was under the influence of alcohol or some type of narcotic or medication. The defendant was taken to the hospital and provided both a urine as well as a blood test. The defendant was charged with DUI Property Damage.
Defense:	The urine and blood tests were taken at the request of medical staff, and not law enforcement. The prosecutors made several attempts to acquire the results of the tests. Each time counsel objected based on HIPPA privacy rights. Eventually, the case was set for trial.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 30, 2024	Case: 22-007009MM10A	Judge Lerner-Wren
Facts:	The defendant was involved in a crash with another vehicle. The first officer on scene took a sworn statement from the driver of the other vehicle who identified the defendant as the driver of the vehicle. The DUI officer arrived on scene and observed a strong odor of alcohol and extremely slurred speech. In addition, the defendant was swaying back and forth on video. The defendant agreed to perform the HGN (eye test) as well as the walk and turn and one leg stand test. The defendant performed poorly on video and was arrested for DUI. The defendant refused to perform a breath test. This was his second DUI.
Defense:	The video certainly indicated a level of impairment. However, counsel argued that the impairment could just as likely come from the crash as opposed to alcohol. As a result, counsel announced ready and set the case for trial. On the morning of trial the state dropped the DUI. The client received no conviction anywhere on his record.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 29, 2024	Case: 24-CT-501056	Judge Gill
Facts:	The defendant was involved in a traffics crash whereby his vehicle rolled over upside down. Officers noticed the defendant to have bloodshot/red eyes, slurred/mumbled speech, and he seemed confused. He swayed while he stood, was screaming, and was very insulting. it should be noted that there was no odor of alcohol. Believing he was impaired by drugs, he was offered field sobriety tests to which he refused. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused a urine test and breath test. This was his Second DUI arrest.
Defense:	Under Florida law, to prove DUI, the State must prove what the defendant was impaired by. Under the DUI statute, 316.193, it must be either alcohol, a specific chemical, or specific controlled substance and/or combination of the latter. Here, there was no odor of alcohol, no mention of drugs, no alcohol or drugs found. Thus, the State could not prove by what specific substance was impairing the defendant. One cannot just be impaired by "anything." The State Dismissed the DUI. It should be noted the firm also beat the defendant's first DUI a few years ago as well.
Result:	The DUI was dismissed.

Jul 29, 2024	Case: 24-CT-501056	Judge Gill
Facts:	The defendant was involved in a traffics crash whereby his vehicle rolled over upside down. Officers noticed the defendant to have bloodshot/red eyes, slurred/mumbled speech, and he seemed confused. He swayed while he stood, was screaming, and was very insulting. it should be noted that there was no odor of alcohol. Believing he was impaired by drugs, he was offered field sobriety tests to which he refused. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused a urine test and breath test. This was his Second DUI arrest.
Defense:	Under Florida law, to prove DUI, the State must prove what the defendant was impaired by. Under the DUI statute, 316.193, it must be either alcohol, a specific chemical, or specific controlled substance and/or combination of the latter. Here, there was no odor of alcohol, no mention of drugs, no alcohol or drugs found. Thus, the State could not prove by what specific substance was impairing the defendant. One cannot just be impaired by "anything." The State Dismissed the DUI. It should be noted the firm also beat the defendant's first DUI a few years ago as well.
Result:	The DUI was dismissed.

Jul 29, 2024	Case: 24-CT-501056	Judge Gill
Facts:	The defendant was involved in a traffics crash whereby his vehicle rolled over upside down. Officers noticed the defendant to have bloodshot/red eyes, slurred/mumbled speech, and he seemed confused. He swayed while he stood, was screaming, and was very insulting. it should be noted that there was no odor of alcohol. Believing he was impaired by drugs, he was offered field sobriety tests to which he refused. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused a urine test and breath test. This was his Second DUI arrest.
Defense:	Under Florida law, to prove DUI, the State must prove what the defendant was impaired by. Under the DUI statute, 316.193, it must be either alcohol, a specific chemical, or specific controlled substance and/or combination of the latter. Here, there was no odor of alcohol, no mention of drugs, no alcohol or drugs found. Thus, the State could not prove by what specific substance was impairing the defendant. One cannot just be impaired by "anything." The State Dismissed the DUI. It should be noted the firm also beat the defendant's first DUI a few years ago as well.
Result:	The DUI was dismissed.

Jul 23, 2024	Case: AIU1A7E	Judge Lawhorne
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, he swayed while he stood, and had watery eyes. He then performed the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand exercises. He was subsequently arrested for DUI.
Defense:	The firm pointed out to the State that on video his speech was not slurred and he did not sway. In fact, he performed dramatically better on the roadside tests on tape than as described in the police reports.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 23, 2024	Case: AHFCCAE	Judge Lawhorne
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving with no lights after dark. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, disorganized speech, and an unsteady/poor gait. The defendant agreed to perform HGN (eye test) and then refused to do any other roadside tests. She was arrested for DUI and 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.

Jul 23, 2024	Case: AIU1A7E	Judge Lawhorne
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, he swayed while he stood, and had watery eyes. He then performed the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand exercises. He was subsequently arrested for DUI.
Defense:	The firm pointed out to the State that on video his speech was not slurred and he did not sway. In fact, he performed dramatically better on the roadside tests on tape than as described in the police reports.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 23, 2024	Case: AHFCCAE	Judge Lawhorne
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving with no lights after dark. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, disorganized speech, and an unsteady/poor gait. The defendant agreed to perform HGN (eye test) and then refused to do any other roadside tests. She was arrested for DUI and 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.

« prev 1 … 22 23 24 25 26 … 363 next »

OBTAIN IMMEDIATE LEGAL HELP

To save your license, you must act within 10 days. Get in touch with our firm by calling 904.450.5220, or fill out the form here.

OBTAIN IMMEDIATE LEGAL HELP

To save your license, you must act within 10 days. Get in touch with our firm by calling 904.450.5220, or fill out the form here.

DUI

PRACTICE

AREAS

I BLEW OVER A 0.08
CAN I WIN MY CASE?

Knowing your rights when being arrested can be the key to a favorable outcome to your case.

WHY HIRE
PARKS & BRAXTON,PA?

With over 4 decades of experience on both sides of the law, we offer strategies for a solid defense

YOU ONLY HAVE 10 DAYS TO GET YOUR DRIVER'S LICENSE BACK

Get you free case evaluation from one of our attorneys within minutes.

Offices Located Throughout the State of Florida

Call
Email
Map
Menu