Oct 4, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-002080CTAXWS	Judge Roberts
Facts:	The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash. When the officer arrived, he observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/glossy eyes, and his answers to the officer's questions were not coherent. The defendant admitted to having drank beer and there was a bottle of vodka and a 12 pack of beer in the defendant's vehicle. He performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. Just prior to the trial date, the firm uncovered that the arresting officer had been terminated after having been arrested on felony charges. The State was also late in providing any discovery such as police reports and video tapes. The firm would not waive speedy trial and moved to compel further info about officer and all discovery. Just a few days prior to trial, the State Dropped the DUI and the defendant received no criminal conviction on his record.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 4, 2019	Case: 19-CT-006693	Judge Smith
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for violating the right of way and almost causing a collision with a police officer. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and he appeared unsteady on his feet. A DUI officer was called to administer roadside tests. The defendant performed very poorly and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .187 and a .183 in the breath machine.
Defense:	During discovery, the firm uncovered that the arresting officer had been terminated for falsification of records and untruthfulness. His credibility as to whether he lied in this case was now called into question. The DUI was Dismissed.
Result:	The DUI was dismissed.

Oct 3, 2019	Case: 19-009212MU10A	Judge Levy
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for inoperable tag lights and swerving. After observing an odor of alcohol, and the defendant stating he had drank 2-3 beers, the officer requested the defendant perform field sobriety tests. The defendant performed very poorly. For example, on the walk and turn, he raised his arms for balance, missed heel to toe, and stepped off the line. On the one leg stand, he raised his arms for balance and put his foot down. He was arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's second DUI.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton filed a pretrial motion to suppress the evidence. In our motion, we alleged that the defendant was unlawfully detained. We argued at the motion hearing that there must be more than a mere odor of alcohol in order to detain a defendant to perform to field sobriety tests. The Judge agreed and granted the motion and threw out all of the evidence. The DUI was then Dismissed.
Result:	The DUI was dismissed.

Oct 2, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-005902	Judge Myers
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving with no tail lights and having his daylight running lights on after dark. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and a flushed face. He stated he had drank two beers, appeared unsteady, and swayed while he stood. He was arrested for DUI after performing several roadside tasks. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
Defense:	According to the NHTSA manual on field sobriety tests, the officer is required to administer them on flat, level surface. Here, it was obvious on tape that the officer had the defendant perform the walk and turn on a downhill slope. Although the officer wrote that the defendant had no medical injuries preventing him from performing the one leg stand, that was contradicted by the video. On tape the defendant his heard telling the officer that he had hip issues. This was pointed out to the State and they Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 25, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-007356	Judge Gutman
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for swerving into the bike lane, speeding, and almost hitting a curb. He had an odor of alcohol, glassy/bloodshot eyes, and he stated he had nothing to drink. He then performed the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand tests. He was then arrested for DUI and later blew a .140 and a .133 in breath machine.
Defense:	Due to the fact that there were no balance problems or speech issues prior to the roadside tasks, there was a lack of reasonable suspicion to even request field sobriety tests. An odor of alcohol and bloodshot/glassy eyes are only indicators of the consumption of alcohol and not impairment.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 24, 2019	Case: 19-CT-004152	Judge Jeske
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving and drifting. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, vomit on his clothing, droopy eyes, and slurred speech. His eyes were bloodshot and he appeared unsteady. He performed very poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .184 and a .183 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The lawfulness of the traffic stop was called into question due to a lack of specifics. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 24, 2019	Case: 19-CT-003598	Judge Conrad
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving at a high rate of speed and almost colliding with a median. He was also weaving and drifting. Since the defendant did not obey commands to remain in the car with hands visible, he was immediately handcuffed until the DUI officer arrived. The officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and watery/red eyes. Once the DUI officer arrived, He only performed the HGN and then refused to perform and further roadsides. He was then arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	There was a de facto arrest when the officers placed the defendant in handcuffs. Since all the DUI observations were made after being cuffed, there was a lack of probable cause to arrest the defendant. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 23, 2019	Case: 19-CT-501522	Judge Paluck
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, a flushed face, droopy eye lids, and bloodshot eyes. He then performed the battery of field sobriety tests. According to the officer, he failed and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. We pointed out to the State that the officer's reports were contradicted by the video. Not one of the defendant's normal faculties were impaired. On the day of trial, the State Dropped the DUI and he received no conviction on his record.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 13, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-022158	Judge Koenig
Facts:	A 911 call was made to police regarding the defendant's erratic driving. Officers located the defendant's car and stopped him. Officers observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, poor balance, and repetitive speech. The defendant performed poorly on the roadside tasks and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .129 and a .128 in the breath machine. This was the defendant's Second DUI arrest.
Defense:	Since there was no substantial corroboration of the driving pattern that the 911 caller had described. Thus the lawfulness of the stop was called into question.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 13, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-021284	Judge Koenig
Facts:	The defendant was involved in a hit and run accident. When officers found him, he was inside his house and he eventually came out to speak to them. He had an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he was very unsteady to the point of stumbling and staggering. He performed very poorly on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	Under Florida law, one must be under the influence of alcohol "at the time of driving" to be convicted of DUI. Here, the State could not prove that he was under the influence while driving because he could have drank while he was in his house.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 13, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-030312	Judge Jacobus
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, slurred speech, and he fumbled with his documents. He also moved very slow and swayed. After performing the HGN (eye test), one leg stand and walk and turn tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The officer did not get an angle of onset (nystagmus) before 45 degrees in the defendant's eyes during the HGN test. An angle of onset prior to 45 degrees, under Tharpe's formula, would show that the defendant may have a breath alcohol level over the legal limit of .08. Here, there was none.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 13, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-029498	Judge Koenig
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for sitting at a green light for several seconds and then swerving. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/glassy eyes, and he stated that he had consumed a couple of drinks. He also had a flushed face and swayed. After performing the field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .170 and a .169 in the breath machine.
Defense:	Since the defendant did not sit through an entire light cycle, and there were no specifics of his alleged swerving. Thus the lawfulness of the traffic stop was called into question.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 13, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-030328	Judge Jacobus
Facts:	A BOLO went out about a reckless driver. The officer spotted the car in question driven by the defendant, and observed her making a wide turn and drifting. After conducting a traffic stop, the officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and slurred speech, She swayed, stumbled, and seemed confused. The defendant refused to perform the roadside tasks other than HGN (eyes test) and was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The defendant was not advised of any adverse consequences relating to her refusal to perform the roadside tasks as required by law.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Sep 11, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-003481	Judge Nimeth
Facts:	The defendant was found passed out by officers in the parking lot of a hotel. Upon contact, the officer noticed mumbling speech, he appeared sleepy and dazed, and he admitted to consuming one beer (no odor of alcohol was observed ). He used the car for support and a beer was found in the car. The officer, believing he was impaired by alcohol, then had him perform field sobriety tests. He was then arrested for DUI. He later took a breath test. Due to the breath alcohol level not being consistent with the impairment level that the officer observed, a DRE (drug recognition officer) was called in. The defendant then submitted to a full DRE drug exam. The defendant admitted to being a pot smoker and also taking some unknown white pill. He also provided a urine sample which came back from FDLE positive for marijuana.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton brought several contradictions between the arresting officer and the DRE officer to the attention of the prosecutor. For one, the officer at the scene got no nystagmus prior to 45 degrees on the HGN (eye test) versus the DRE officer at the station got nystagmus prior to the 45 degrees. This is important because the DRE officer concluded that the defendant was impaired by a CNS depressant, and NOT marijuana which is the substance he tested positive for at FDLE. An officer wont see nystagmus prior to 45 degrees if under the influence of marijuana. The DRE was wrong. The firm then requested the state to disclose which "specific" controlled substance the state was going to argue that the defendant was impaired by as required by law. They could not and the DUI was dismissed.
Result:	The DUI was dismissed.

Sep 11, 2019	Case: 19-CT-004194	Judge Gutman
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for swerving and driving too slow. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and diminished dexterity. He also appeared disoriented, had glassy/watery eyes, and unsteady balance. The defendant refused to perform the roadside tasks and was arrested for DUI. Upon being asked to provide a breath test, the defendant refused and stated, "I ain’t providing you shit."
Defense:	The observations that the officer wrote in his report were contradicted by the videotape. This was brought to the State's attention and the DUI was Dropped.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 30, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-025238	Judge T. Brown
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for drifting and driving too slow. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and the defendant had difficulty locating his paperwork. His speech was slurred, he had a flushed face, and he swayed. After performing the roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .132 and a .129 in the breath machine.
Defense:	During the short distance and time frame that the officer followed the defendant, his alleged drifting did not affect other traffic and neither did his driving too slow for conditions. Thus, the lawfulness of the traffic stop was called into question. The State Dropped the DUI and he received no conviction on his record.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 28, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-002266	Judge Rada
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. Upon contact, the officer observed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and mumbling speech. He was slow in his movements and he admitted to drinking wine. After refusing to do roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The video contradicted the reports. For example, his speech was not mumbled and he wasn't moving slow. The State, after negotiations, Dropped the DUI short of going to trial.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 27, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-000772AX	Judge Henderson
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding and weaving. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he fumbled with his documents. He had slurred/mumbled speech and he dropped his wallet on the ground. He also swayed and moved slow. After performing the roadside tasks such as the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .141 and a .141 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The video contradicted the officer's reports and clearly showed that the defendant's level of impairment was consistent with someone who was lower than .141 at the time of driving. To prove DUI, one has to be "driving" with an unlawful breath alcohol level.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 26, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-027913	Judge Atkin
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, glassy/watery eyes, slurred speech, and he was slow in his movements. He swayed while he stood and admitted to having consumed whiskey with water. According to the officer, he performed poorly on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .109 and a .112 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The lawfulness of the traffic stop was called into question as the alleged weaving did not rise to the level of reasonable suspicion of a crime justifying pulling him over.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 19, 2019	Case: A9EVMRE	Judge Mckuyton
Facts:	The defendant was found inside his car and he was in the driver's seat parked against a curb. His car was facing in the wrong direction which is an infraction. The officer had the defendant roll his window down. The officer then noticed an odor of alcohol and bloodshot/watery eyes. He admitted to having consumed 3 beers and then performed field sobriety tests. He was then arrested for DUI and later blew a .127 and a .126 in the breath machine.
Defense:	There was insufficient reasonable suspicion of a crime (i.e. not enough specific articulable facts other than odor and bloodshot eyes) to justify the initial detention of the defendant. Thus, if the initial detention was unlawful, all of the roadside tests and breath test would be excluded from evidence.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.