Sep 22, 2022	Case: 22-MM-02314	Judge Mkyton
Facts:	The defendant's boat was stopped for a safety inspection. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol and requested that the defendant perform roadside tests. At first he refused, then he agreed to perform various field sobriety tests used in boating under the influence case such as the finger to nose, palm pat, and hand coordination. He was then arrested for Boating Under the Influence and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	Based on an odor of alcohol alone, there was no reasonable suspicion of a crime to believe that the defendant was operating his vessel while impaired to lawfully even request field sobriety tests.
Result:	The State Dropped the BUI.

Sep 22, 2022	Case: AEX8ZDE	Judge Szematowicz
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving over 100 mph. The officer noticed bloodshot/watery eyes and eye lid tremors. He also had body tremors, a strong odor of burnt marijuana coming from this breath, and slurred speech. He was then asked to perform various roadside tests such as the HGN (eye test), one leg stand, walk and turn, and finger to nose. He also had the defendant estimate the passage of 30 seconds in his head otherwise known as the Rhomberg balance. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused a urine test.
Defense:	The defendant had Delta 8 marijuana in his car which is legal. He stated that is all he uses. It was unknown whether he was impaired by the legal Delta 8 or the illegal Delta 9 marijuana.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 20, 2022	Case: 21-012854MU10A	Judge Solomon
Facts:	The defendant was involved in a crash whereby he hit a car and ended up colliding with a utility pole. Several officers arrived to conduct an accident investigation. At the same time, a deputy arrived to conduct a criminal investigation. On video, the deputy asked the defendant a series of questions. In response to questioning, the defendant acknowledged that he was the driver. The defendant performed extremely poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He was taken to the police station and blew a .219 and a .213 in the Intoxilyzer. This was the defendant's second DUI.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton filed a motion to suppress based on an unlawful arrest. First, the firm filed a motion to exclude the defendant's statements because the deputy failed to read him his Maranda warnings. Next, counsel argued that pursuant to 316.645, the arresting deputy, who never spoke with the other civilians in the crash, had no probable cause to arrest the defendant. The motion was granted. All evidence was excluded.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 20, 2022	Case: 22-CT-003226	Judge Conrad
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/glassy eyes, and he displayed cognitive deficiencies. For example, he could not find his cell phone even though it was on his lap, and also was forgetful while speaking to the officer. The defendant appeared unsteady and swayed while he stood. He then performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
Defense:	Many of the observations that the officer described in his reports were contradicted by the video tape. The State agreed and Dropped the defendant's Second DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 19, 2022	Case: 22-CT-500946	Judge M. Gonzalez
Facts:	The defendant was found by the police sitting in her car with the door open at a RaceTrac gas station. She had just thrown up outside the driver's door. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, vomit, watery eyes, and she was very confused. She swayed and had a dazed look. She then performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused a breath test.
Defense:	The State could not prove the defendant was in actual physical control. The vehicle was a push-start and the key fob was on a seat. With those facts and the door being open, she had no "capability" to operate the car.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 12, 2022	Case: 22-CT-006112	Judge Silver
Facts:	The police received a call from a Shell gas station that a customer's car had been stolen. The officer located the car in question and conducted a traffic stop. The defendant, who was the driver, appeared confused as to what was going on. She had an odor of alcohol, slurred/slow speech, and admitted to having drank vodka. She performed very poorly on roadside tests. The defendant could not say the alphabet correctly, stumbled all over the place on the walk and turn, and put her foot down numerous times on the one leg stand. She was arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	It was the defendant who actually called the police because she couldn't find her car. The gas station owner told the police that it was the owner's car and that she had found. This was prior to the traffic stop. On tape, the officer can be heard stating to another cop that he knew that, but just "wanted to verify." There was no lawful basis for the traffic stop once the officer is heard on tape stating he knew the defendant found her car and it was hers.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 12, 2022	Case: 22-CT-010522	Judge Panse
Facts:	Officers located the defendant and her car parked at a 45 degree angle on the shoulder of a roadway. Officers had been dispatched to a BOLO about a car missing an entire left front tire and a seemingly impaired driver. Officers noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and a flushed face. She also had thick/slurred speech and didn't remember how the tire came off. She then performed various roadside tests such as the Rhomberg balance (estimate 30 seconds), alphabet, one leg stand, and walk and turn. She was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	When officers arrived, the defendant was standing at her back bumper. It could not be determined if there was a crash or not. Under Florida Statute 901.15, when there is no crash, an officer must observe all elements of the misdemeanor in their presence. (i.e. the defendant either driving and/or in actual physical control). If not, the arrest is unlawful.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 8, 2022	Case: 22-CT-009235	Judge Booras
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving with no lights and swerving in and out of the lanes of travel. She also nearly struck a sign. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slow/unclear speech, and red/glassy eyes. She also appeared shaky on her feet. After performing various roadside tests, she was arrested for DUI and later blew a .187 and .182 in the breath machine.
Defense:	After several conversations with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant herself, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 7, 2022	Case: 22-CT-003506	Judge Scott
Facts:	The defendant was found asleep in his car while it was running. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and he appeared unsteady. Beer was also found in the car. He then performed various field sobriety tests such as the walk and turn and HGN (eye test). He was then arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test.
Defense:	There was no video dash camera or body camera in the case. The reports were vaguely written and didn't provide many specifics.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 6, 2022	Case: 21-CT-503888	Judge Swett
Facts:	The defendant was found passed out in a parking garage. Officers saw the defendant's door open and also the passenger door open. The defendant, who was in the driver's seat, and the passenger were practically unconscious. The car was running and officers were yelling at them to wake up, doing sternum rubs, and also checking pulses. EMS was called as well. When the defendant was taken out the car, he tried to go back to sleep on the ground. Officers noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and red eyes. He appeared incoherent on tape and performed poorly on roadside tests. He was arrested for DUI and later blew a .170 and .166 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The State could not prove that the defendant was in actual physical control because he had no "capability" to operate the vehicle while being passed out.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 6, 2022	Case: 21-CT-503413	Judge Swett
Facts:	Officers were called to a 7-11 reference a suspicions person call. When officers arrived, the defendant pulled out of the parking lot and drove up on the curb. The defendant then followed a van too closely and ran a stop sign. He then drove off the roadway and the officer conducted a traffic stop. There was no odor of alcohol, but the officer observed droopy eye lids, bloodshot eyes, and he handed the officer a health insurance card instead of his driver’s license. He also staggered, stumbled, and swayed. He had a dazed look and appeared sleepy. Believing he was impaired by drugs, he then performed various roadside tests and was subsequently arrested for DUI. At the station, he also submitted to a DRE (drug recognition exam). He later provided a urine sample which revealed a positive result for a controlled substance after being tested by FDLE.
Defense:	Issues were presented to the State by the defense as to contradictions between the DRE exam field sobriety tests done at the station versus the roadside tests done as the scene.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 1, 2022	Case: 22-CT-004440	Judge Conrad
Facts:	The police were called about a suspicious vehicle. When officers arrived, the defendant was parked and asleep in the driver's seat of his truck. The vehicle was off and the keys were on the defendant's lap. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he was making unusual statements. He also had bloodshot eyes and admitted to having drank 4-5 vodka/diet cokes. He refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The State could not prove that the defendant was in actual physical control of the truck as he had no "capability" to operate the truck while sleeping and the engine being off.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 1, 2022	Case: 22-CT-003219	Judge Conrad
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for straddling the lane markers and almost sideswiping a guardrail. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, watery/glassy eyes, and displayed cognitive issues when being spoken too. The defendant first denied drinking then later admitted to having drank beers. He then performed various field sobriety tests such and the HGN (eye test), one leg stand, and walk and turn. He later blew a. 182 and .181 in the breath machine.
Defense:	After several discussions with the State regarding the evidence and the defendant, they Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 31, 2022	Case: 22-CT-6438	Judge Conrad
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving without lights and also failing to stop at a stop sign. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and she appeared unsteady. She then refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused a breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI and she was also charged with refusing to provide a breath test for the second time.
Defense:	We pointed out to the State that the defendant did not appear unsteady at all on video. In fact, she walked and stood perfectly normal. In addition, her speech sounded normal and she had no issues exiting her car. The State Dropped the defendant's Second DUI and also dismissed her second refusal charge.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 31, 2022	Case: 22-CT-005947	Judge Conrad
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving westbound in the eastbound lane of travel. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, she admitted to having drank 3 beers, and had red/glassy eyes. She then performed various field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .146 and .140 in the breath machine.
Defense:	After several negotiations with the State about the evidence and the defendant, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 31, 2022	Case: 22-CT-5196	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving 99 mph in a 45 mph zone. He also drove around other cars very closely, almost causing an accident. He was then stopped and ordered out of the car. He was not complying with officers' commands and they handcuffed him. Officers then smelled and odor of alcohol and also noticed bloodshot eyes. He was arrested at that point for reckless driving and resisting an officer without violence. At the jail, he was asked to perform roadside tests to which he refused. A DUI charge was then added. He then refused a breath test. This was the Defendant's Second DUI and also he was charged with a Second Refusal to provide a breath test.
Defense:	An officer must advise a defendant of adverse consequences if they refuse to perform field sobriety tests. Here, the officer didn't comply with the law and gave no adverse consequences. Thus, the defendant's refusal to do roadside tests would have been excluded from evidence. In addition, when the officer read the defendant the implied consent upon requesting a breath test, they read him the wrong implied consent. Here, officer read him the one that applies to boating under the influence cases and not DUI's. Thus, the defendant's refusal to provide a breath sample would have been excluded from evidence. The State Dropped the defendant's Second DUI, Dismissed the second refusal charge, Dismissed the reckless charge, and he received no further penalties on the resisting charge.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 30, 2022	Case: 20-CT-003489	Judge Steele
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding and drifting into oncoming lanes. He was then very slow to stop even with lights and sirens. The officer noticed and odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and droopy eye lids. He performed very poorly on roadside tests. For example, on the walk and turn, he stepped off the line and lost his balance during the instructions. On the one leg stand, he used his arms for balance and placed his foot on the ground multiple times. He was arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The officers were having problems with the breath machine. The defendant never actually refused to take the breath test. The first time he blew, they alleged there were two invalid breath samples. The next time he was going to blow, the machine failed as it reflected RFI (radio frequency interference). The third time he was going to blow, the were two more alleged invalid samples.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 30, 2022	Case: AFLPCOE	Judge Croff
Facts:	The defendant was involved in a traffic crash with another car. She was alleged to have failed to yield to oncoming traffic. When officers arrived, they observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot/glassy eyes. She also had a blank expression on her face. She refused to perform any roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The firm pointed out to the State that based on the evidence, such as witness statements, police reports, and the physical evidence, it was unclear whether the defendant or the other car was at fault. In addition, on tape, the defendant did not have any blank look and was totally responsive and coherent. Furthermore, her speech sounded normal on tape, and not slurred.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 30, 2022	Case: AG3AUEE	Judge Lawhorne
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for running a red light. The officer smelled an odor of alcohol, noticed glassy/watery eyes, and the defendant appeared unsteady. The defendant also admitted to having drank beer. After performing several field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .086 and .083 in the breath machine.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton pointe out to the State that with the .02 margin of error in the breath machine, the defendant's two breath alcohol results of .086 and .083 were under the legal limit. In addition, English is the defendant's second language. He had a lot of difficulty understanding the officer's instructions during the DUI investigation.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.