Jun 13, 2023	Case: 22-CT-014074	Judge Gutman
Facts:	A call went out to police from the defendant's family that she was missing. An officer spotted the defendant in her truck in a parking lot. The keys were in her possession, she was asleep, and the car was off. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol and vomit on the ground. She then was asked to perform roadside tests to which she refused. She was then arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test.
Defense:	The defendant was not in actual physical control as she was sleeping, the car was off, and in a parking lot. She had no "capability " to operate the car.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jun 13, 2023	Case: 22-CT-014039	Judge Gutman
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for running a red light. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech and red/glassy eyes. She also stated that she had two drinks. After performing field sobriety tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .137 and .121 in the breath machine.
Defense:	After several conversations with the state regarding the evidence and the defendant, they Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jun 12, 2023	Case: 21-CT-007287	Judge Bennett for Judge Grode - JURY TRIAL
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding, failing to maintain a single lane, jerking the wheel, and flashing his high beams on and off. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he struggled to retrieve his driver's license. He appeared to have a diminished capacity to utilize fine motor skills, almost fell while picking up his wallet he dropped, and used his truck to maintain balance. He also stumbled and fell against the driver's side of the truck. He then performed the walk and turn and one leg stand. On the walk and turn, he never touched heel to toe, used his arms for balance, and stepped off the line. On the one leg stand, he could not complete the exercise past the number four due to severe balance issues. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test.
Defense:	The firm announced ready for trial. At jury trial, we pointed out there was no video and that all the jury had to rely upon was the testimony of one officer. There was no dash camera, no body worn camera, and no other video or audio devices used. The officer testified that there was no policy preventing them from the videotaping. However, neither the arresting officer, nor three backup officers on scene, chose to even pull out a cell phone to video tape the investigation. In addition, the officer wrote two reports. The first report contained nothing about weaving, using high beams, slurred speech, or stumbling and falling. In his second report, written some time later, he added all those observations. He was impeached as to the difference in the reports. The Jury took only ten minutes to find the defendant Non Guilty.
Result:	The Jury found the defendant NOT GUILTY.

Jun 8, 2023	Case: AGR3YDE	Judge Komninos
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for having no headlights or taillights on after dark. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, disheveled clothing, and his pupils were constricted. His speech was slurred and he used the car for support. He then performed various field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .138 and .136 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.

Jun 8, 2023	Case: A6SA81E	Judge Komninos
Facts:	The defendant was found passed out by fire rescue. They had to assist the defendant out of the vehicle due to his intoxication level. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and thick tongued speech. The defendant admitted to drinking alcohol and stated he was hammered. No field sobriety tests were conducted for the defendant's safety. He later refused a breath test.
Defense:	Since no officer saw the defendant behind the wheel and there was no crash, the arrest was unlawful under Florida Statute 901.15. That statute states that in a misdemeanor case, the officer must observe every element of the crime (i.e. driving or in actual physical control).
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jun 8, 2023	Case: AGR3RLE	Judge Komninos
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and she appeared unsteady. She also appeared unsure and swayed while she stood. She then performed various roadside tests such as the walk and turn, one leg stand, and HGN (eye test) and was subsequently arrested for DUI. She later refused a breath test.
Defense:	Many of the written observations prior to and during roadside tests were contradicted by the video tape.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jun 7, 2023	Case: 21-018010MU10A	Judge Gottlieb
Facts:	The defendant was involved in a crash. The 911 caller indicated that the defendant struck a parked car, an electric pole as well as two mailboxes. The initial deputy on scene observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot watery eyes as well as slurred speech. In addition, he stated that she was extremely incoherent. The defendant was subsequently taken to the hospital due to the severity of the crash. A DUI task force officer was called to conduct a DUI investigation. The officer arrived at the hospital and made contact with the defendant in one of the trauma rooms. After speaking with the defendant, the officer asked the defendant to perform field sobriety tests within the emergency room. Body-worn video captured the defendant's poor performance on the sobriety tests. The defendant was charged with DUI and subsequently refused a blood test.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton filed a motion to suppress based on the unlawful detention of the defendant within her emergency trauma room. On video you can see the defendant's back to the officer. He enters the room without a warrant or consent from the client and begins his DUI investigation. On the stand the officer was unable to testify approximately how long the defendant was to remain in the hospital. The Supreme Court has indicated that the longer a person remains in the hospital room the greater the expectation of privacy that person would have. We expect doctors and nurses to enter our emergency room. However, we do not expect law enforcement to enter the room. As a result, the Judge agreed that our client had an expectation of privacy within her hospital trauma room. The officer never had permission to enter the room. He certainly never acquired a warrant to enter the room. All of the evidence was excluded from trial.
Result:	The DUI was dismissed.

Jun 7, 2023	Case: 23-CT-027235	Judge Garagozlo
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for failure to yield while pulling out of a parking lot. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, a red face, and slurred speech. The defendant stated he had consumed two drinks. He then performed various field sobriety tests such as the walk and turn, one leg stand, and HGN (eye test). He was then arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test.
Defense:	The firm spoke to the prosecutor after watching the video tape. Not one of the defendant's normal faculties were impaired and there was no probable cause to arrest him. The State agreed and Dropped the DUI to a Civil Careless Driving Citation with no points and no conviction.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jun 6, 2023	Case: 22-CT-016874	Judge Conrad
Facts:	The defendant crashed her car into a guardrail causing damage. When the officer arrived, she was passed out. The officer had to bang on the door and yell at the defendant to get her to wake up. Once awoken, the officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and mumbled/slurred speech. She appeared confused and failed to listen to the officer's commands. She refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused a breath test.
Defense:	One could not hear anything the officer, nor the defendant were saying on tape because the officer had his car radio blasting talk radio. After negotiations regarding the lack of audio evidence, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jun 6, 2023	Case: 22-CT-100228	Judge George
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for accelerating at a high rate of speed and changing lanes from a left turn only to drive north. Officers noticed the defendant to have constricted pupils, a flushed face, and his speech was low and slow. His coordination was poor and the defendant stated he had only taken his prescribed medications, Hydrocodone and Adderall. There was no odor of alcohol. Believing he was impaired by drugs, he was requested to perform field sobriety tests. He performed poorly and was arrested for DUI. He later provided a urine sample which came back positive for the Adderall and also marijuana. At the station, he also submitted to a DRE (drug recognition exam).
Defense:	The DRE officer concluded that the defendant was under the influence of a class of drugs called narcotic analgesics, as well as an amphetamine. Well, the defendant told them he had taken the amphetamine (i.e. Adderall), so that was not a strong conclusion. Hydrocodone is a narcotic analgesic. The defendant tested negative for that so the DRE was wrong. This was pointed out to the State. Also, the officer never concluded marijuana. Marijuana can be in one's system for up to 30 days. The defendant told the cops he had taken the Adderall that morning as prescribed. He told them he had been working on roofs all day and was not impaired. The day of trial call, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jun 5, 2023	Case: 23-CT-000124	Judge Bryson
Facts:	The defendant was pulled over for running a red light. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol and bloodshot eyes. The defendant stated he had drank one beer and two shots. He then performed various field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test.
Defense:	The firm pointed out to the State that based on the defendant's performance on the roadsides on tape, there was no probable cause to believe he was impaired. The State watched the video at our request and agreed. They then Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jun 1, 2023	Case: 23-CT-019977	Judge Atkin
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he swayed while he stood. He then performed field sobriety exercises such as the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one legs stand. He was then arrested for DUI.
Defense:	After viewing the video in discovery, the firm contacted the State. We pointed out that none of the defendant's normal faculties were impaired and that his roadside tests were almost perfect. We stated that was no probable cause to even arrest him. The State agreed and Dismissed the DUI.
Result:	The DUI was dismissed.

May 31, 2023	Case: 22-CT-015976	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, red/bloodshot eyes, and his balance was unsteady. There was also a strong odor of marijuana coming from the defendant's person. The defendant refused to perform field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test.
Defense:	After several conversations with State regarding the evidence, they Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

May 31, 2023	Case: 22-CT-016419	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving with no lights after sunset. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/glassy eyes, and lethargic movements. The defendant then performed various roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI and he was also charged with Second refusal for not taking a breath test.
Defense:	On tape, the defendant performed very poorly on the field sobriety tests such as the walk and turn and one leg stand. However, prior to the roadsides, none of his normal faculties were impaired. Our argument to the State was that the roadside tests are not normal activities. The State Dropped the defendant's Second DUI and he also received no further penalties on the refusal charge.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

May 31, 2023	Case: 22-CT-015443	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, slow/slurred speech, watery eyes, and unsteady balance. The defendant performed very poorly on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused a breath test.
Defense:	Prior to trial, the firm provided medical documentation to the State from the defendant that the defendant suffered head injuries during the accident. Thus, there was doubt as to whether she was impaired by alcohol versus impairment because she was injured in the crash.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

May 30, 2023	Case: 21-003436CF10A	Judge Kollra
Facts:	The defendant was involved in a serious rear end collision resulting in several victims, including one driver who was in a Coma. The officers on scene made contact with the defendant and observed a strong odor of alcohol, unsteadiness on his feet, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes as well as a flushed face. The defendant performed and failed a series of field sobriety tests on video, including the walk and turn, one leg stand as well as the HGN (eye test), and was arrested for DUI Serious Bodily Injury as well as five (5) other counts of DUI with Injury and Property Damage. The defendant had a .147 blood alcohol level. The defendant scored between 24 months to 7 years in Florida State Prison.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton received a list of over 60 witnesses. In addition, we received several hours of body worn camera footage which included witness statements, the DUI investigation, as well as the hospital video with the defendant. The initial investigation by the police seemed to conclude that the defendant was driving at a high rate of speed and ultimately rear ended the victim who ended up in a coma. Parks & Braxton then began taking depositions of the State's witnesses. It soon became evident that many of the witnesses who gave sworn statements on video only heard the crash as it happened and didn't actually see the initial contact. In addition, Parks & Braxton was able to recreate the crash and prove that the victim first hit another car and then spun out into the middle of the roadway in front of the defendant's vehicle. Ultimately, the two crash investigators on scene agreed in deposition that the victim was the at fault driver in the crash. The felony DUI Serious Bodily Injury was dismissed. Four of the other DUI Injury and Property Damage counts were dismissed. The defendant received a misdemeanor DUI with probation.
Result:	The DUI with Serious Bodily Injury was Dismissed. Four (4) other counts of DUI Injury and Property Damage were Dismissed.

May 25, 2023	Case: 21-002211MU10A	Judge Francois
Facts:	The defendant was found asleep parked in between two pumps at a gas station. The keys were in the ignition and the engine was running. The initial officer spoke with the employees inside the gas station and then made contact with the driver. The officer knocked on the window for a couple of minutes before the defendant woke up. The officer told the defendant to turn the car off and exit the vehicle. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes as well as a flushed face. In addition, the defendant was wet near the crotch and waistband area. A subsequent officer was called to the scene to conduct a DUI investigation. She asked the defendant for his driver's license and he handed over his garage door remote. The DUI officer began explaining the investigation to the defendant. The defendant made an aggressive move towards the officer and was then placed under arrest for DUI. The defendant subsequently refused to submit to a breath test.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton took the deposition of the two officers. The initial officer admitted that despite the defendant's condition he was unaware that the defendant was impaired prior to asking the defendant to turn off the vehicle. In addition, once the officer admitted to speaking with the gas station employees first, he couldn't then back track and say that he thought the defendant was possibly sick or injured. Parks & Braxton filed a motion to suppress based on an unlawful detention. Specifically, the officer testified that until he made physical contact with the defendant he agreed that there was no traffic infraction, no reasonable suspicion of a crime, and no reasonable belief that the defendant needed emergency assistance. On the morning of the motion, the prosecutor agreed to drop the DUI. The defendant walked away with no conviction on his record.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

May 24, 2023	Case: 23-CT-000154	Judge Dekleva
Facts:	The defendant was stopped as he was observed hugging the lane markers from one side to another and also abruptly changing lanes. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/glassy eyes, and his speech was thick tongued. He had a strong smell of cologne and his mouth was very dry as he had to lick his lips numerous times. He denied having anything to drink, however, later he stated he had drank a beer. He then performed the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test.
Defense:	The firm raised issues as to the lawfulness of traffic stop due the lack of specifics provided regarding the driving pattern.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

May 24, 2023	Case: 23-101730MMDL	Judge C. Miller
Facts:	The defendant was stopped after being observed with his tires well past the stop bar. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slightly slurred speech, and glassy eyes. The defendant denied drinking and then later stated he had drank beer. After performing various field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused a breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI arrest.
Defense:	The officer had no clue how to position his body worn camera. When the defendant was performing the walk and turn, no one could see his legs from the knees down. Thus, no one could see if he was touching heel to toe or if he was stepping off the line. On the one leg stand, we could not see from the knees down as well. Again, no one could see whether he actually put his foot down. After speaking with the State, they Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

May 23, 2023	Case: 22-CT-017772	Judge Farr
Facts:	While the defendant's boyfriend was being detained, the defendant tried to drive off. Officers had told her do not drive away because she had been drinking. Once they stopped her, they noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and slurred speech. She was also unsteady. After performing various roadside tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .179 and .178 in the breath machine.
Defense:	Officers had no legal basis after only limited observations of the defendant to justify ordering her to not drive. The State agreed and Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.