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

Mar 28, 2018 Case: 17-011425MU10A Judge Solomon
Facts: The defendant was observed asleep in a vehicle that was occupying the middle of the road. When the police approached the car, they noticed a white powdery substance on the defendant's nose. In addition, the officers observed an odor of alcohol as well as bloodshot eyes. The defendant admitted to drinking four beers. The defendant agreed to perform field sobriety tests and was subsequently arrested for DUI.
Defense: Despite the fact that the defendant had consumed both cocaine as well as alcohol, it was still incumbent on the part of the prosecutor to prove that his normal faculties were impaired. The video contradicted a fair amount of the officer's sworn affidavit.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Mar 20, 2018 Case: A6MM7OE Judge Bedinghaus
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding and failing to maintain a single lane. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol and blood shot eyes. The defendant refused to perform the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense: An officer must have probable cause to believe that a defendant was "impaired" in order to arrest a defendant for DUI. Under the case law, and under the facts of this case, we pointed out to the State in pretrial talks that there was no probable cause.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Mar 20, 2018 Case: A6MLJKE Judge Bedinghaus
Facts: The defendant was stopped for weaving, speeding up and slowing down, and stopping over the stop bar. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, a flushed face, and bloodshot eyes. The defendant then performed the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand exercises. She was then arrested for DUI after her performance and later refused the breath test.
Defense: Prior to trial, we pointed out out to the State, that it was clear on video tape that the defendant was the proverbial "guinea pig" so a new officer in training can learn how to do a DUI. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Mar 20, 2018 Case: A6MM6YE Judge Bedinghaus
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding. Upon contact, the officer observed an odor of alcohol and glassy/glazed eyes. The defendant swayed as he stood and he admitted to consuming three beers. According to the officer, he performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .105 and .102 in the breath machine.
Defense: On video, the defendant's performance on the field sobriety tests contradicted the officer's description in the police reports. Prior to trial, and after negotiations, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Mar 15, 2018 Case: 2016-CT-002094 Judge Shoemaker
Facts: The defendant was the at fault drive in a rear end crash. When officers arrived, they observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, an orbital sway, and she admitted to having drank wine. Due to injuries sustained by the defendant in the crash, she only performed the HGN (eye test). She was then transported to the hospital. The defendant provided an blood sample to the police. A blood alcohol toxicology report revealed results of .120 and .120. Once the blood was analyzed and the officer received the FDLE results, the defendant was subsequently charged by the State with DUI.
Defense: Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State that the blood was illegally drawn by the officer. First, the officer who requested blood was outside his jurisdiction. Thus he had no authority to even order a blood draw. Additionally, the officer unlawfully coerced her into consenting to provided a blood sample by telling her that her driver's license will be suspended. Finally, the officer used the wrong documents required by FDLE when conducting a blood draw.
Result: The DUI was dismissed.
Mar 9, 2018 Case: 2017-MM-022576AXXXXX Judge Silverman
Facts: The defendant rear ended another car in the drive thru lane of a McDonalds. The defendant was observed by the police to have a strong odor of alcohol, slow speech, and glassy eyes. The person he crashed into stated to the police that the defendant had stumbled out the car. The defendant then performed the field sobriety tests on video tape. After performing the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand exercises, he was arrested for DUI. A search incident to arrest revealed marijuana in the defendant's car for which he was later charged with possession. He subsequently refused the breath test.
Defense: Prior to trial, the defendant filed a motion to sever the DUI charge from the Possession charge. During discussions prior the motion, the firm pointed out to the State that the officer's reports exaggerated the defendant's alleged impairment on his performance on the field sobriety tests versus what was depicted on tape. The State Dropped the DUI and the defendant received No conviction on the possession charge.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Mar 9, 2018 Case: 2018-CT-000545 Judge Shepherd
Facts: The defendant was spotted by the police late at night, behind closed businesses. The officer turned on his overhead lights and stopped the defendant to find out what was going on and why he was back there. Upon contact, the officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol and slurred speech. A bottle of wine was found in the car. When the defendant stepped out of the car, he was very off balance and stumbling. The defendant performed very poorly on the roadside tasks and was arrested for DUI. He subsequently refused the breath test.
Defense: Parks & Braxton brought to the State's attention the case law on illegal traffic stops when someone is simply behind a closed business late at night. In order to stop someone, there must either be probable cause that the defendant committed a traffic infraction and/or there must reasonable suspicion of crime. Here there was neither. Thus, the traffic stop was unlawful. The DUI was Dismissed.
Result: The DUI was dismissed.
Mar 2, 2018 Case: 2017-CT-020801 Judge Hanser
Facts: The defendant was stopped for failing to stop behind the stop bar line. The officer observed the defendant to have a strong odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he was unsteady exiting the car. The defendant stated he had drank wine earlier. He performed poorly on field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .153 and .140 in the breath machine.
Defense: After numerous pretrial discussions, the State Dropped the DUI. We pointed out to the State that in the area that the defendant allegedly went over the stop bar, he did so out of "necessity," as one cannot see oncoming traffic without having to cross over it.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Mar 2, 2018 Case: 2017-CT-017882 Judge Cunningham
Facts: The defendant was stopped for allegedly having one operable brake light. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he stated he had drank two IPA beers. The defendant performed very poorly on the roadside tasks. For example, on the one leg stand, he put his foot down numerous times, swayed, and used his arms for balance. He also mixed up letters during the alphabet. He was arrested for DUI and later blew a .163 and .154 in the breath machine.
Defense: Pretrial, the firm pointed out to the State that there was no probable cause to lawfully stop the defendant as his brake light was working and the reason the officer provided did not meet the requirements of the inoperable brake light statute.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Mar 2, 2018 Case: 2017-CT-017999 Judge Hanser
Facts: The defendant was found passed out behind the wheel of his car. Upon awakening the defendant, the officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant was then asked to perform field sobriety tests. For example, on the alphabet test, the defendant messed up numerous letters. On the walk and turn, he stepped off the line and did not touch heel to toe. He was then arrested for DUI and subsequently blew a .110 and .103 in the breath machine.
Defense: After pretrial talks, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Feb 26, 2018 Case: 2017-CT-001931 Judge Duckworth
Facts: The defendant was hit head on by another driver who fled the scene. When the ambulance arrived, they noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol. Police were called. Upon contact with the defendant, the police noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and she was unsteady. Due to injuries sustained in the accident, the defendant was transported to the hospital. There, a blood draw was requested and the defendant complied. The FDLE lab report later revealed a blood alcohol level of .240 and .240. The defendant was subsequently charged with DUI.
Defense: In order to get the blood results into evidence, a proper FDLE implied consent predicate must be laid in court. Prior to trial, the firm pointed out numerous mistakes made by the officer in his DUI blood paperwork packet used in this case. After review, the State agreed that the blood would not be admitted into evidence. Without the blood result, any impairment observed could have been as easily been attributed to the airbags hitting the defendant versus alcohol. The DUI was Dismissed
Result: The DUI was dismissed.
Feb 22, 2018 Case: 17-011498MU10A Judge Levy
Facts: The defendant was stopped for weaving all over the road. Other cars had to avoid her in order to avoid a collision. She also struck the curb numerous times. Once stopped, the officer observed the defendant to appear confused and have dilated pupils. She had a flushed face, glassy eyes, and she was unsteady. Believing she was impaired, the officer requested the defendant to perform roadside tasks. She performed very poorly and was arrested for DUI. The defendant subsequently refused the breath and urine tests.
Defense: Parks & Braxton filed a pretrial motion to exclude the defendant's refusal to provide a breath sample. The basis of our motion was that there was no probable cause to request a breath test since there was no odor of alcohol nor any indication of consumption of alcohol on the day in question. The Judge granted that motion. The firm then filed a motion for statement of particulars in an attempt to pin the state down as to what specific chemical and/or controlled substance was allegedly impairing the defendant as required by Florida Statutes. They were unable to do so at the motion hearing and then were forced to Dismiss the DUI.
Result: The DUI was dismissed.
Feb 15, 2018 Case: A6MLF3E Judge Riba
Facts: The defendant was stopped after illegally driving through a construction zone that had barriers around it. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol and bloodshot eyes. She also appeared to be swaying and was unsteady. After performing the roadside tests, she was arrested for DUI. The defendant subsequently refused the breath test.
Defense: The video contradicted the officer's reports as they related to her alleged swaying, unsteadiness, and also her performance on the field sobriety exercises. The Sate Dropped the DUI short of trial.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Feb 14, 2018 Case: 15-23979MU10A Judge Levy-Cohen
Facts: The defendant was stopped for failing to obey a traffic signal device. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he staggered as he walked. While talking to the officer, he swayed consistently and stated he had consumed a couple of drinks. He was then asked to perform field sobriety tests to which he refused. He was then arrested for DUI and subsequently refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
Defense: Parks & Braxton filed a pretrial motion to exclude the defendant's refusal to perform field sobriety tests. The basis of our motion was that the officer never advised the defendant of any adverse consequences for refusing. The Judge granted the motion. The State then took an appeal. On appeal, the firm, in our reply brief, cited all the applicable case law to defend the judge's initial correct legal ruling. In its appellate ruling, the circuit court ruled in our favor and this has now become one of the lead opinions on this issue. The State then Dismissed the defendant's Second DUI.
Result: The DUI was dismissed.
Feb 8, 2018 Case: 2017-CT-015794 Judge Farr
Facts: The defendant was approached by police after he backed into another vehicle. The defendant had an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and a flushed face. The defendant swayed while standing and admitted to having drank three beers. After performing field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI and subsequently refused the breath test.
Defense: Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. A few days before trial after pretrial talks, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Feb 8, 2018 Case: 2017-CT-011653 Judge Weis
Facts: The defendant as the at fault driver in a rear end crash. Officers did not observe an odor of alcohol, but noticed very slurred speech, watery/glassy eyes, and he was very unsteady. He then performed the walk and turn exercise whereby he stepped off the line, took an incorrect number of steps, and did not touch heel to toe. On the one leg stand, he put his foot down and used his arms for balance. He was then arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he provided a urine sample which later tested positive at the FDLE lab for marijuana and Xanax. He was charged with driving under the influence of a chemical and/or controlled substance.
Defense: After negotiations, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Feb 7, 2018 Case: 16-16380MU10A Judge Carpenter-Toye
Facts: The officer observed the defendant failing to stop at a red light. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and slurred speech. In addition, he stated that the defendant swayed noticeably from side to side. The officer stated that the defendant performed poorly on all roadside tests. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
Defense: In pretrial depositions, it was discovered that there was another officer on scene. The arresting officer testified that the other officer was on scene during the field sobriety tests and would be able to corroborate the poor performance on the roadside tests. The second officer testified that he did not arrive until the defendant was placed in cuffs. There was no video to confirm the arresting officers story.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Feb 6, 2018 Case: 16-009796MU10A Judge Evans
Facts: The defendant was observed sleeping at a light with the keys in the ignition and the engine running. When the officer knocked on the window, the defendant proceeded to drive away at a high rate of speed. After conducting a traffic stop, the officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, as well as the smell of burnt marijuana. On video, the defendant admitted to smoking marijuana. He performed field sobriety exercises and was arrested for DUI.
Defense: There were clear inconsistencies between the video and the officer's reports.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Feb 6, 2018 Case: 2017-CT-012898 Judge Jeske
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding and failing to maintain a single lane. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, and she had unstable balance. The defendant stated she had drank wine that night. After performing field sobriety tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later blew a. 10 and a .10 in the breath machine.
Defense: The officer's reports contradicted what was on video tape. For example, she had no slurred speech and was not off balance. Also, her roadside tests were much better than what was detailed in the police reports.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Feb 6, 2018 Case: 2017-CT-005857 Judge Jeske
Facts: The defendant was stopped for turning the wrong way down a one way street. The officer observed an odor of alcohol and bloodshot eyes. The defendant denied having had anything to drink. He then performed the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand exercises. He was subsequently arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .115 and .113 in the breath machine.
Defense: When the defendant approached the one way street, he had no choice but to turn because he could not go straight as required. During a pretrial investigation by the firm, it was determined there was a sign straight ahead at the intersection indicating that the interstate was blocked. Thus, the defendant had no choice but to turn down the one street out of "necessity." This was brought to the State's attention that the defendant may have been unlawfully stopped as he acted under "necessity."
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Offices Located Throughout the State of Florida