Parks & Braxton, PA: Miami DUI Lawyer | Criminal Defense
| Case: STATE V. A.G. | Judge | |
| Facts: | The defendant was charged with grand theft for allegedly stealing money from his employer. If convicted, the defendant faced up to five years in prison. | |
| Result: | The defendant only received one day of probation and no felony conviction on his record. | |
| Case: STATE V. P.V. | Judge | |
| Facts: | The defendant was charged with domestic aggravated assault and aggravated stalking. He was alleged to have went to the victim's house, violated a restraining order, and chased her with a knife in front of three witnesses. | |
| Result: | The defendant received no jail, no prison, and no felony conviction on his record. | |
| Case: STATE V. C.O. | Judge | |
| Facts: | The defendant was charged with possession of cocaine. He allegdly threw down a baggie of cocaine after being stopped for driving recklessly. He faced up to 5 years in prison for the third degree felony. | |
| Result: | The defendant received NO felony conviction and only had to pay court costs. | |
| Case: STATE V. M.M. | Judge | |
| Facts: | The defendant was charged with felony possession of cocaine. It was found in her purse after being arrested for DUI. | |
| Result: | The defendant received no felony conviction, no jail, no probation and no two year driver's license suspension. | |
| Case: STATE V. S.M. | Judge | |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for running a stop sign. The officer smelled burning marijuana from the car. The defendant admitted smoking the pot and also swallowed some of it. The officer also found more pot and cocaine in the car. The defendant was arrested for possession of marijuana, possession of cocaine, and destruction of evidence. | |
| Result: | The defendant received no felony convictions on his record and no jail time. | |
| Case: STATE V. J.J. | Judge | |
| Facts: | The defendant was charged with three counts of battery by strangulation. He was facing Florida State prison time if convicted. | |
| Result: | The defense got all charges dismissed prior to the case even entering the justice system. | |
| 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. 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. | |
| Case: STATE V. K.S. | Judge | |
| Facts: | The police conducted a traffic stop on the defendant's car for a seat belt violation. When the officer approached the car, he smelled an odor of marijuana coming from inside the vehicle. The officer had the defendant step out of the car and then noticed marijuana in plain view on the rear left rear floor board in a zip locked bag. The defendant admitted the marijuana was his for personal use. The defendant was charged with possession of marijuana. | |
| Result: | The defendant received No criminal conviction for a drug charge and the firm also saved the defendant from losing his driver's license for two years by not being convicted of said drug charge. | |
| Case: STATE V. R.F. | Judge | |
| Facts: | Grand Theft, Burglary of a Structure | |
| Result: | The defendant was charged with grand theft and burglary of a structure. The defendant was facing ten years in prison. The State could not prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt based on inconsistencies the defense was able to point out to the jury and the jury found the defendant not guilty on both counts. | |
| Case: STATE V. J.T. | Judge | |
| Facts: | Lewd and Lascivious Act on a Child Under 16 Years Old | |
| Result: | The defendant was charged with lewd and lascivious act on a child under 16 years old. The defendant was facing up to 15 years in the State Prison. At trial, the defense was able to impeach the alleged victim with inconsistencies in her statements on cross examination. The jury found the defendant guilty of a lesser charge, misdemeanor battery, and he received probation and not one day in jail. | |
| Case: STATE V. M.A. | Judge | |
| Facts: | Attempted First Degree Murder, Aggravated Battery on a Law Enforcement Officer, Grand Theft of a Motor Vehicle, Resisting an Officer with Violence | |
| Result: | The defendant was charged with attempted first degree murder, aggravated battery on a law enforcement officer, grand theft of a motor vehicle, and resisting an officer with violence. The defendant was facing life in prison. At jury trial, the defense argued the defendant acted in self defense. The defense put the defendant on the witness stand to tell his side of the story that he was just protecting himself and the jury found him not guilty on all charges. | |
| Case: STATE.V. R.P. | Judge | |
| Facts: | Four Counts of Aggravated Assault with a Firearm and Shooting into a Dwelling | |
| Result: | The defendant was charged with four counts of aggravated assault with a firearm and shooting into a dwelling. She faced up to 35 years in prison, including 3 year minimum mandatory prison sentences on each aggravated assault count. At trial, numerous witnesses gave different accounts about the incident as each witness was questioned by the defense. Due to their contradictory stories and conflicts in the evidence, such as no shell casings being found by police, the jury found the defendant not guilty on all counts. | |
| Case: STATE V. M.W. | Judge | |
| Facts: | Robbery with a Firearm | |
| Result: | The defendant was charged with robbery with a firearm. The crime was punishable by life in prison. The defense argued the defendant was misidentified by the victim. The jury found the defendant not guilty. | |
| Case: STATE V. L.R. | Judge | |
| Facts: | Two Counts of Battery on Law Enforcement Officers | |
| Result: | The defendant was charged with two counts of battery on law enforcement officers and facing ten years in prison. The defense was able to establish that the defendant acted in self defense as he was being beaten by the cops and pepper sprayed. The jury found the defendant not guilty on both counts. | |
| Case: STATE V. D.R. | Judge | |
| Facts: | Attempted First Degree Murder and Aggravated Battery | |
| Result: | The defendant was charged with attempted first degree murder and aggravated battery. The defendant stabbed the alleged victim in a bar fight. The accuser made several allegations at trial which were not consistent with his pre-trial deposition testimony. Also, the defense argued self defense since the accuser attacked the defendant first according to eye witness statements. The jury found the defendant not guilty on both counts. If convicted, the defendant would have been sent to prison for the rest of his life. | |
| Case: STATE V. J.O. | Judge | |
| Facts: | Sexual Battery | |
| Result: | The defendant was charged with Sexual Battery. He faced up to 15 years in State prison if convicted. At trial, the victim elaborated her story in that she stated the defendant hit her and ripped her clothes. The detectives did not corroborate her story when they testified. Further, the day after the alleged rape, the victim went to the defendant’s house to confront him. At trial, the defense argued that it was absolutely ridiculous an alleged rape victim would go to the alleged rapist’s house. Along with the contradictions in her story versus the physical evidence brought out on cross examination, the jury found him not guilty. | |
| Case: STATE V. V.F. | Judge | |
| Facts: | Armed Burglary of a Dwelling | |
| Case: STATE V. V.B. | Judge | |
| Facts: | Possession of Cocaine | |
| Result: | The defendant was charged with possession of cocaine. He faced five years in prison on this third degree felony. All the officers contradicted each other’s testimony when cross examined and the defendant was found not guilty. | |
| Case: STATE V. R.S. | Judge | |
| Facts: | Five Counts of Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon, Aggravated Battery on a Police Officer with a Deadly Weapon | |
| Result: | The defendant was charged with five counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon (a car) and aggravated battery on a police officer with a deadly weapon (a car). He faced up to 105 years in prison. At trial on all charges, the defense argued the defendant’s “intent” was to get away from police during the chase, not to cause them fear. The jury found no “intent’ and found him not guilty on all counts. | |
| Case: STATE V. L.H. | Judge | |
| Facts: | Robbery with a Deadly Weapon | |
| Result: | The defendant was charged with robbery with a deadly weapon (to wit: a stick). If convicted, he faced life in prison. The defendant had a lengthy felony record. At trial, a photo pack was shown to the victim who picked the defendant out of the pictures. When the photo pack was shown at trial, the defendant’s head was the smallest and looked nothing like the other five men in the pack. The defense argued misidentification due to the suggestive nature of the pictures. The defendant was found not guilty. | |
Knowing your rights when being arrested can be the key to a favorable outcome to your case.
With over 4 decades of experience on both sides of the law, we offer strategies for a solid defense
Get you free case evaluation from one of our attorneys within minutes.