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

ALSO SERVING ST. JOHNS, CLAY, FLAGLER, NASSAU COUNTIES
904.450.5220
Call 24/7 Nights, Weekends & Holidays
Free Consultations
ALSO SERVING ST. JOHNS, CLAY, FLAGLER, NASSAU COUNTIES
904.450.5220
Call 24/7 Nights, Weekends & Holidays
Free Consultations
Call
Email
Map

RESULTS

OUR RECENT VICTORIES

Aug 11, 2020 Case: 20-CT-000306 Judge Conrad
Facts: The defendant was stopped for driving with no headlights. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and red eyes. She was also unsteady on her feet. She was arrested for DUI after performing several filed sobriety tests. She later refused the breath test.
Defense: The defendant had several medical issues which could have affected her balance and performance on the walk and turn and one leg stand. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Aug 6, 2020 Case: 19-CT-018267 Judge Jeske
Facts: A civilian called 911 stating that the defendant was driving all over the road. When police found the defendant, he was standing outside his car at a gas station. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, unstable balance, and slurred speech. He stated he had drank 3 to 4 beers. He performed poorly on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .216 and a .204 in the breath machine.
Defense: Under Florida Statue 901.15, when there is no crash, an officer must observe every element of the crime of DUI, including seeing the defendant either driving or in actual physical control. Otherwise, the arrest is unlawful. Here, the arrest was unlawful because no officer saw the defendant driving or behind the wheel. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Aug 5, 2020 Case: 2020-CT-014428 Judge Babb
Facts: The defendant was stopped for driving with no lights and weaving. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glassy eyes. She also admitted to having consumed a couple of drinks. She swayed and appeared unsteady. After performing the roadside tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later blew. a .162 and a .162 in the breath machine.
Defense: The reports contradicted the video as to numerous specifics on the field sobriety tests. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Aug 5, 2020 Case: 20-CT-002585 Judge Gutman
Facts: The defendant was stopped for driving the wrong way down a one way street. The officer observed an odor of alcohol and his eyes were bloodshot. He then performed roadside tests such has the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense: There must be reasonable suspicion of a crime to request field sobriety tests. In other words, the officer must observe some indication of impairment. Here, there was no erratic driving and the bloodshot eyes and odor of alcohol are indicators of consumption of alcohol, not impairment. Thus, the State was at risk of having all the roadsides excluded from evidence. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jul 30, 2020 Case: 19-CT-057709 Judge Peacock
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding and weaving. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. His movements were slow, he was clumsy, and he swayed. After performing filed sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .20 and a .199 in the breath machine.
Defense: Due to contradictions in the reports versus the video, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jul 29, 2020 Case: 19-CT-019541 Judge Gutman
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding and weaving. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he swayed while he stood. He performed the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .129 and a .126 in the breath machine.
Defense: The video contradicted the officer's reports as to the level of impairment. The defendant's performance on the field sobriety tests also showed that the defendant's breath alcohol level has to have been lower at the time of driving under the theory of absorption and elimination of alcohol. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jul 29, 2020 Case: 19-CT-018436 Judge Gutman
Facts: The defendant was found passed out his car. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and watery/glassy eyes. The defendant agreed to perform the walk and turn, one leg stand, and finger to nose exercises. He failed them and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .136 and a .130 in the breath machine. This was the defendant's Third DUI arrest.
Defense: Prior to trial, the firm pointed out issues as to the lawfulness of the initial contact and ordering him out of the car. We put forth that the officers didn't have the requisite reasonable suspicion of crime to justify ordering him to step out. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jul 29, 2020 Case: 20-CT-001817 Judge Gutman
Facts: The defendant was found passed out in her car in a parking lot. The officers also observed alcohol in the car. It took numerous attempts to get the defendant to respond and wake up. Upon awakening the defendant, they observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and she had to use the car to maintain her balance. She performed poorly on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .178 and a .159 in the breath machine.
Defense: In order to prove that the defendant was in actual physical control, the of State must prove that the defendant had the capability of operating the vehicle. Here, they could not because one cannot operate the vehicle while sleeping. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jul 29, 2020 Case: 20-CT-002203 Judge Gutman
Facts: The defendant was involved in a crash in a parking garage. The officer observed an odor of alcohol and bloodshot eyes. The defendant agreed only to perform the HGN (eye test). He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense: The firm pointed out to the State that while performing the HGN (eye test) the defendant stated he had eye damage, yet the officer still continued to check his eyes. The officer didn't even clarify what type of injury it was that could affect the nsytagmus in his eyes. Thus, the officer's credibility was called into question and the State dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jul 28, 2020 Case: 19-CT-010248 Judge Panse
Facts: The defendant was in involved in a single vehicle motorcycle accident whereby he crashed and flipped the bike over. The defendant had already been transported the hospital when police arrived at the scene of the crash. Upon going to the hospital to make contact with the defendant, the officers observed an odor of alcohol. The officer then requested the defendant provide a blood sample. The blood alcohol results from the FDLE lab were a .239 and a .240. The defendant was then charged with DUI.
Defense: Under Florida law, there must be more than a mere odor of alcohol to request blood. Here, the blood was drawn illegally without the requisite observations by the officer. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jul 28, 2020 Case: 19-CT-023581 Judge Hanser
Facts: The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash. Officers observed the defendant to have slurred speech and lethargic movements. He also swayed and had trouble maintaining his balance. There was no odor of alcohol. Believing that the defendant was impaired by drugs, he was asked to perform field sobriety tests. For example, on the alphabet, the defendant missed letters and stated the letters out of order. On the one leg stand, he almost fell. The defendant was then arrested for DUI. The defendant later refused to provide a urine sample.
Defense: One cannot simply just be impaired by "something." Here, the State could not prove by which specific drug was impairing the defendant. The State Dropped the DUI and the defendant received no criminal conviction.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jul 27, 2020 Case: 19-CT-020062 Judge Alijewicz
Facts: The defendant was stopped for driving with no lights. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he appeared dazed and confused. He was also observed to have very slurred speech. After performing field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .201 and a .202 in the breath machine.
Defense: The officer did not write any specific details as to the defendant's performance on the field sobriety tests in the probable cause affidavit. Due to the vagueness in the reports, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jul 20, 2020 Case: 19-CT-504466 Judge Gagliardi
Facts: The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash. The defendant allegedly drove at a high rate rate of speed over a bridge and struck another car. The officers observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, dilated pupils, and bloodshot/watery eyes. According to the officer, he failed the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath tests.
Defense: The impairment observed on the roadside tests, such as the walk an turn and one leg stand, could have as easily been attributed to the defendant being hit in the face by the airbags which caused him to be very unsteady, versus impairment by alcohol.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jul 1, 2020 Case: 19-CT-001340 Judge Burns
Facts: The defendant was stopped for weaving. He was crossing over the lane markers numerous times and driving on the grassy shoulder. The officer conducted a traffic stop believing that he may be an impaired driver. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and he swayed. He refused to do roadsides and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense: Parks and Braxton filed a motion to exclude any evidence that the defendant refused field sobriety tests. Under Florida case law, a defendant must be given adverse consequences by the officer if he refuses roadside tests, before the refusal can be admissible in court. Here, the officer did not give any. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jun 26, 2020 Case: AB6TC6E Judge Bedinghaus
Facts: The defendant was stopped for allegedly cutting off a motorcycle. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, watery/glassy eyes, and mumbled speech. He was also unsteady and admitted to having drank two beers. After performing the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and finger to nose tests, he was arrested for DUI. Believing he may have also been impaired by a controlled substance, the officer requested urine in which the defendant tested positive for marijuana.
Defense: Prior to trial the firm was able to show the State that the defendant had knee injuries which affected his performance on the roadsides. In addition, the State could not prove that he was impaired by marijuana as no DRE (drug recognition officer) evaluated the defendant and marijuana stays in one's system for 30 days. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jun 26, 2020 Case: AB7HF3E Judge Bedinghaus
Facts: The defendant was stopped for having inoperable taillights. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/watery eyes, and he stated he had drank beer. According to the officer, he failed the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .084 and a .081 in the breath machine.
Defense: The firm was able to point out to the State that the defendant's breath alcohol level was under the legal limit at the time of driving through the theory of retrograde extrapolation. In other words, going back in time. Under Florida law, for one to be guilty of DUI, one has to have an unlawful breath alcohol level "at the time of driving."
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jun 26, 2020 Case: AALGCJE Judge Bedinghaus
Facts: The defendant was stopped for driving without his headlights. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and mumbling speech. The defendant also had fumbled dexterity and the front of his pants were wet. After performing field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense: The defendant performed much better on the roadsides on videotape than as described by the officer in his reports. His speech was also clear and he did not appear to be off balance in regards to his dexterity. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jun 22, 2020 Case: 19-CT-056664 Judge Babb
Facts: The defendant was stopped for an inoperable tag light. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, red/glassy eyes, and she admitted to having consumed a couple of drinks. The defendant had clumsy dexterity and mumbled speech. After performing field sobriety tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .184 and a .172 in the breath machine.
Defense: Many of the officer's observations, prior to and during the roadside tests, were contradicted by the video tape. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jun 11, 2020 Case: AALGFFE Judge Berlin
Facts: The defendant was found passed out in his car in a construction site after a call went out about a suspicious vehicle. Upon awakening the defendant, the officers observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/watery eyes, and dilated pupils. The defendant was unsteady exiting his car and swayed while he stood. According to the officer, he failed the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense: The video of the roadsides and the defendant's entire demeanor contradicted the officer's reports as to the level impairment. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jun 2, 2020 Case: 20-CT-500329 Judge Swett
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding and weaving. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, thick tongued speech, and bloodshot/watery eyes. She also had a flushed face. After performing field sobriety tests, she was arrested for DUI. The officer also called in a DRE (drug recognition expert) because he had a belief she was also impaired by a controlled substance in addition to alcohol. She then submitted to the DRE exam at the BAT facility.
Defense: After the officer's DRE exam, the DRE officer concluded that she was impaired by controlled substances. The firm was able to show through further discovery that his conclusion was wrong. The State Dismissed the DUI.
Result: The DUI was dismissed.
Offices Located Throughout the State of Florida