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

Jun 26, 2018 Case: 18-CT-00068 Judge Everett
Facts: The defendant was stopped for driving the wrong way. The defendant had an odor of alcohol, slurred/mumbled speech, and he stated he had drank 3 to 4 beers and also smoked pot earlier in the day. The defendant denied being drunk and refused to perform field sobriety tests. He was then arrested for DUI. The search incident to arrest of the defendant's vehicle revealed marijuana and paraphernalia.
Defense: It was evident from the discovery that the only reason the defendant was arrested for DUI was because he was refusing to perform roadside tests and cooperate, not because the police had probable cause. The State Dropped the DUI and he received no convictions for the possession of pot and paraphernalia charges.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jun 25, 2018 Case: 2018-CT-001399 Judge Cameron
Facts: The defendant crashed his car into a giant palm tree. When police arrived, they saw the car up on a curb and up against the tree. The defendant was observed to have an odor of alcohol, slurred/mumbled speech, and he was off balance, staggering, and unsteady. The defendant was asked to perform field sobriety tests to which he complied. He performed very poorly and even stated "I am intoxicated." He was then arrested for DUI.
Defense: In order to arrest someone for DUI, there must be probable cause. Here, the investigating officer didn't make any personal observations and relied on another officer's upon arriving. He then immediately went up to the defendant within seconds and asked him to perform the roadside tasks. When the defendant initially said no, he was immediately cuffed and told he was under arrest. He then stated he would do them and was subsequently uncuffed. However, due to the initial illegality of cuffing the defendant without probable cause, all the evidence would have been thrown out including the field sobriety tests, observations, and statements. The State agreed and Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jun 22, 2018 Case: 2017-CT-020592 Judge Hanser
Facts: The defendant was stopped for a defective tail light. Officers observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. The defendant stated he had drank 2 beers. He performed poorly on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .192 and .183 in the breath machine.
Defense: The firm brought information forward that the tail light was not defective. We argued that if the traffic stop was unlawful, all the evidence would have been thrown out.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jun 22, 2018 Case: 2017-CT-003998CTAXWS Judge Poblick
Facts: The defendant was stopped for swerving and straddling the lane markers. Officers observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol and watery/glassy eyes. The defendant stated she had drank 2 to 3 beers. Her coordination and listening ability were fair. She then performed the field sobriety tests and was subsequently arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test.
Defense: It was apparent that the description the officers wrote about the defendant's level of impairment was contradicted by the video tape. The State Dropped the DUI and the defendant received No Conviction at all on her record.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jun 18, 2018 Case: 16-024677MU10A Judge M. Brown
Facts: The defendant was involved in a one car crash on the highway. Upon arrival, the the officer observed a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes as well as slurred speech. The defendant agreed to perform the walk and turn, one leg stand as well as the HGN (eye test) exercises. The officer stated that the defendant was unable to walk a straight line or keep her foot up during the sobriety tests. All tests were supposedly captured on video. The defendant was arrested for DUI.
Defense: Upon receipt of the evidence, it was clear that there was a malfunction regarding the video equipment. Counsel argued that any evidence that would have been captured on video should be excluded.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jun 15, 2018 Case: 2017-CT-052281AXXXXX Judge Atkin
Facts: The defendant was found inside his car at a bar parking lot. Attention was drawn to his vehicle because his car alarm was going off. When the officer went to the car, the defendant was trying to get the alarm to turn off. Officers observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and a flushed face. He swayed and his movements were slow. He admitted to consuming several beers earlier in the night. He performed poorly on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI.
Defense: Officers had no reasonable suspicion of a crime to order the defendant to roll down his windows prior to making any DUI observations. Thus, all of the evidence that was gathered after he was ordered to roll down his windows was illegally obtained.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jun 13, 2018 Case: 2018-CT-000650 Judge Shoemaker
Facts: The defendant was found passed out in his car by an officer. Upon awaking the defendant, the officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he stumbled while he stood. His eyes were bloodshot and his mouth as dry and pasty. He performed poorly on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI.
Defense: Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. Given the fact that the defendant was sleeping behind the wheel of the vehicle, there was a question as to whether the defendant was in actual physical control of a motor vehicle. On the day of trial, the State dropped the DUI.
Result: On the day of trial, the State Dropped the DUI and the defendant received no conviction at all on his record.
Jun 8, 2018 Case: 2017-CT-050712AXXXXX Judge Naberhaus
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot/glassy eyes. He was slow to exit the vehicle, slow walking, and swayed while he stood. According to the officer, he performed poorly on the roadside tests which were videotaped and he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense: On tape, the officer misstated the law and coerced the defendant into performing field sobriety tests. The firm then pulled the applicable case law and filed a motion to suppress the roadside tests. Prior to any motion hearing being held, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jun 8, 2018 Case: 2018-CT-013770AXXXXX Judge Naberhaus
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding. Upon contact, the officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and she admitted to having drank 2 to 3 Bud Light beers. She swayed while she stood and was emotional. After performing the field sobriety tests on tape, she was arrested for DUI.
Defense: The firm had discussions with the State whereby we pointed out them that the defendant's "normal faculties" were not impaired as required by Florida law.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jun 7, 2018 Case: 2017-CT-023188 Judge Valkenburg
Facts: Police were dispatched to a call about a reckless driver. Upon seeing the car matching the description, which was driven by the defendant, the officer observed her run a stop sign. He then initiated a traffic stop. He observed her to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and she admitted to having drank beer. Officers also observed slurred speech and unsteadiness. She refused to perform roadside tasks and was arrested for DUI.
Defense: There was no video and the officer only wrote in generalities in his reports. For example, he wrote she was "unsteady" but failed to articulate what facts led him to believe that. The firm pointed this out to the State prior to trial and they Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jun 7, 2018 Case: 2017-CT-022170 Judge Valkenburg
Facts: The defendant was involved in a one car crash whereby she drove off the roadway into a ditch. She also hit a DOT sign which ended up causing the car to be totaled and airbags were deployed. When the trooper arrived, he noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, an orbital sway, and glassy eyes. She admitted to drinking post Miranda and then was asked to perform the HGN (eye test ), walk and turn, and one leg stand exercises. She performed poorly on video tape and was arrested for DUI. She subsequently refused the breath test.
Defense: Prior to trial, the firm sent the State pictures of the totaled car, the airbags deployed in the car, and photos of the defendant's injuries after the crash. It was obvious that the alleged impairment could have been as easily to do with the severity of the crash versus alcohol. Yet, the officer still had her doing a walk and turn and one leg stand tests versus non-physical exercises like the alphabet and finger to nose tests.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jun 7, 2018 Case: 2017-CT-038928 Judge Ingram
Facts: The defendant was involved in a crash whereby he struck a mailbox, a fire hydrant, and finally a tree stump. Prior to the crash, a caller called 911 about the defendant driving recklessly. Officers observed the defendant to have bloodshot eyes, slurred/mumbled speech, and he was unsteady. The defendant staggered, stumbled, and had various mood swings. Believing he was impaired by drugs, he was asked to perform field sobriety tests. He performed very poorly and was arrested for DUI.
Defense: Under Florida law, a person can only be convicted of DUI if they are impaired by a specific chemical and/or controlled substance, other than alcohol of course. The defendant admitted to taking various pills for different conditions and sleeping meds, but did not specify which ones. Although he was impaired, the State could not prove by which chemical and/or controlled substance specifically was impairing him as required by Florida Statute 316.193 (the DUI Statute).
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jun 7, 2018 Case: 2017-CT-000050 Judge S. Jewett
Facts: A caller advised 911 that the defendant was driving all over the road. When police spotted the defendant's car, they observed him drifting all over and almost crashing. Upon contact, after the traffic stop was conducted, officers detected a faint odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he rambled on about unrelated topics. He appeared sleepy, had flaccid muscle tone, glassy eyes, and was very unsteady. He performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused breath and urine tests.
Defense: There were no body cameras or an in-car camera on scene. Officers believed the defendant was impaired by a chemical and/or controlled substance. Since the defendant never submitted to a DRE (drug recognition exam), the State Dropped the DUI and the defendant received no criminal conviction on his record.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jun 4, 2018 Case: 18-CT-500084 Judge Gagliardi
Facts: The defendant was stopped for weaving and following too closely. Once stopped, the officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He also had a flushed face, lethargic movements, appeared unsteady, and stated he had a couple of drinks. He then performed the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense: Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. There was no video tape and the officer did not describe the roadsides in any detail in his reports. Due the lack of specificity, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
May 29, 2018 Case: 2017-CT-021396 Judge Farr
Facts: The defendant was stopped for driving the wrong way down a one way street. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. The officer observed her to be unsteady and that she stumbled. She refused to perform the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test.
Defense: The video contradicted the officer's reports. For example, the defendant's speech did not appear to be slurred on tape and she was not off balance or unsteady. This was discussed with the prosecutor who then Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
May 29, 2018 Case: 17-018984MU10A Judge Levy
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/watery eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant denied having drank any alcohol. A DUI officer was called who made similar observations. The defendant was asked to perform the HGN (eye test), one leg stand, Rhomberg balance (estimation of time), finger to nose, and walk and turn exercises. He performed the all of them except the walk and turn. He refused to perform the walk and turn because he thought the line was not straight and that he was nervous. He was then arrested for DUI and refused the breath test. This was the Defendant's Second DUI within five years.
Defense: Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. Just prior to trial, in discussions with the State, we pointed out that the video totally contradicted what was written in the police reports. Many of the officer's written observations of the specifics of the roadside tests were contradicted by the tape. On the day of jury trial, the State Dropped the defendant's Second DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
May 16, 2018 Case: 2018-CT-001171 Judge Valkenburg
Facts: A civilian flagged down an officer and told them that a vehicle driven by the defendant had been drifting all over the road. The officer then followed the defendant and observed weaving. He then conducted a traffic stop. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, watery/glassy eyes, and the defendant stated he had been drinking beer while playing golf. After performing field sobriety exercises on tape, the defendant was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense: The video tape in the case contradicted the officer's written reports as to the alleged level of impairment prior to and during the roadside tests. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
May 16, 2018 Case: 17-015788MU10A Judge Gottlieb
Facts: The defendant was the at fault driver in a traffic crash. When officers arrived, they noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred/incoherent speech, and she fumbled with her items. The defendant was very argumentative with the officers. She then performed the field sobriety exercises. For example, on the walk and turn, she stepped off the line, did not touch heel to toe, and made an improper turn. On the one leg stand, she raised her arms for balance, swayed, and did not count as instructed. She was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense: The firm took a lengthy pretrial sworn deposition of the arresting officer. During questioning, the officer contradicted her police reports and could not remember many important details about the facts of the case. After the State read the depo and realized that their officer's credibility was called into question, they Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
May 14, 2018 Case: 2017-CT-504418 Judge Hayward
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding. Upon contact, the officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/watery eyes, and slurred speech. His face was flushed and he appeared to speak incoherently. There was also damage to both his side passenger tires as if he had just hit something. He refused to perform roadside tasks and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
Defense: A breath test can only be offered after one is arrested for DUI. In this case, the officer asked the defendant for a breath test prior to placing him under arrest. Thus, his refusal to take a breath test was inadmissible under law. This was brought to the State's attention. They agreed and Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
May 10, 2018 Case: A6MLM4E Judge Riba
Facts: The defendant was stopped for stopping past the stop bar, fishtailing and driving at a high rate of speed. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and watery/glassy eyes. He swayed while he stood and his dexterity was unsure. The defendant admitted to having drank two beers. He performed poorly on the field sobriety tests according to the officer and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .099 and a .101 in the breath machine.
Defense: Parks & Braxton provided documentation to the prosecutor showing that the defendant's both breath test results were under the .08 legal limit at the time of driving as required by Florida law. This is called retrograde extrapolation. We also pointed out that due to the .02 margin of error in the machine, the .099 could have also been as low as a .079 (under the legal limit).
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Offices Located Throughout the State of Florida