Nov 19, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-009305	Judge Conrad
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding (85 mph in a 55 mph zone). The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and fumbling fingers. He also had bloodshot eyes and unstable balance. The defendant admitted to having consumed three Crown Royal whiskey drinks. After performing the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand exercises, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .135 and a .133 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The defendant's performance on the field sobriety tests on video tape clearly showed that he was still absorbing alcohol and his breath alcohol content may have been lower than .08 at the time of driving. It should be noted that the breath test as taken almost 90 minutes after the traffic stop.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Nov 19, 2019	Case: 19-CT-041668	Judge Koenig
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding (80 mph in a 50 mph zone) and weaving in and out of traffic. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slightly slurred speech, and bloodshot/watery eyes. The defendant was also slow exiting the car. He refused to perform field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	Due to the defendant not performing the roadside tests, it was apparent on tape there was a lack of probable cause to arrest the defendant. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Nov 18, 2019	Case: 19-CT-019013	Judge Damico
Facts:	The defendant was stopped after failing to stop at a red light. The red light camera flashed numerous times. The officer then proceeded through traffic to stop the defendant. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant stated he had drank a couple of glasses of wine. He refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton showed that the defendant never ran the red light and that the officer never obtained the red light camera. From his vantage point, and traffic, there was no way he could have seen the defendant run a red light. Thus, the lawfulness of the stop was called into question and so was the officer's credibility.
Result:	The DUI was dismissed.

Nov 18, 2019	Case: 19-CT-015564	Judge Jeske
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving all over the road. Upon contact, the officer observed the defendant to be lethargic, have bloodshot eyes, and he swayed. The defendant admitted to having smoked pot with some friends prior to driving. After performing field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later provided a urine sample which tested positive for marijuana at the FDLE lab.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton provided evidence to the State regarding the defendant's car, showing the alignment and tires were messed up which would have caused it to swerve. Also we pointed out to the State that on tape there was no probable cause to arrest the defendant for DUI. The State agreed and Dismissed the DUI.
Result:	The DUI was dismissed.

Nov 15, 2019	Case: 2019-MM-034754	Judge Atkin
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for swerving. The defendant had an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and was unsteady. He admitted to having drank 3 beers and was also swaying. He performed poorly on the roadside tests. For example, on the walk and turn, he stepped off the line, lost his balance while turning, and took an incorrect number of steps. On the one leg stand, he put his foot down, hopped and swayed. He was then arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. He was also charged with possession of marijuana.
Defense:	The firm raised issues of the lawfulness of the traffic stop due to other traffic not being affected by his driving. The State Dropped the DUI and the possession charge was dismissed.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Nov 13, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-001887	Judge Myers
Facts:	The defendant struck a median and a FDOT sign causing damage. A police officer observed the crash and stopped the defendant. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/glassy eyes, and slurred speech. She was unsteady exiting her car, swayed as she stood, and stated she had drank two cocktails. Due to safety concerns, no roadside tests were conducted and she was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The video contradicted the majority of the officer's observations as written in the reports.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 31, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-011030	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was found by police passed out in his car in a parking lot. The officers made contact with him to assess his well being. The officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He admitted to having drank 4 beers. After performing poorly on the roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .185 and a .183 in the breath machine.
Defense:	Since the defendant was sleeping in his car, he was not in actual physical control. He had no "capability" to operate the vehicle while sleeping.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 30, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-007931	Judge
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving with her high beam lights on at night. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and fumbling fingers. She also had slurred speech and admitted to having drank vodka/cranberry. After performing the field sobriety tests, she was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she blew a .149 and a .160 in the breath machine.
Defense:	On video, it appeared as if one officer was training the other. The trainee mixed up several parts of the instructions on the field sobriety tests in contradiction to the NHTSA manual on roadsides The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 30, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-009273	Judge Jeske
Facts:	The defendant was found passed out in his car. The officers noticed an odor of alcohol upon awakening the defendant. They also noticed that he was unsteady, had glassy eyes, and slurred speech. He performed poorly on the roadside tests. For example, on the walk and turn, he stepped off the line and was not walking heel to toe. On the finger to nose, he missed the tip of his nose several times. He was arrested for DUI and later refused a breath test.
Defense:	For the police to order someone out of their car, the officers must have reasonable suspicion of crime. In other words, there must be some specific facts to point too that the defendant was impaired, and not just innocently sleeping. Here, there was none. Thus, the initial ordering of the defendant out of his car was unlawful and all the evidence could have been thrown out. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 29, 2019	Case: 19-001027MU10A	Judge M. Brown
Facts:	The defendant was the at fault driver in a crash whereby he hit a pole. He was found in his car, a little bit down the road. The officers observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glassy/bloodshot eyes. He appeared to be in a daze, unsteady, lethargic, and stumbling. He was asked to perform roadside tests to which he refused. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test. He was also charged with leaving the scene of an accident.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. The arresting officer's own body worn camera contradicted his written reports. The defendant was not off balance, stumbling or unsteady. In addition, the officer misstated the law when asking for roadside tests by telling him that his license will be suspended. A license suspension only applies to a refusal to provide breath, blood, or urine. On the day of trial the State Dropped the DUI and he received no conviction in his record. They also Dismissed the leaving the scene of the accident because the defendant simply pulled down the road to get away from the wires.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 28, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-000772	Judge Tinlin
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding and swerving. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, a flushed face, and slurred speech. The defendant admitted to having drank wine, swayed, staggered, and was disoriented. She performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .191 and a .189 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The officer misstated the law and coerced the defendant into taking a breath test. Thus, the breath test may have been excluded from evidence.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 24, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-502000	Judge Gagliardi
Facts:	The defendant was the at fault driver in a crash whereby she made a wide turn and hit another car. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, thick tongue speech, and bloodshot eyes. She admitted to having consumed 4 to 5 drinks. She performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she blew a .107 and a .107 in the breath machine.
Defense:	There was no video at the scene. The officer's reports were very vague as to the specifics of the defendant's performance on the roadside tests. Also, the defendant was not administered the breath test for a few hours after her arrest. Thus, there was no way to extrapolate back as to whether she was above or below .08 at the time of driving.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 22, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-012250	Judge Conrad
Facts:	The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, a pale face, and she was off balance. She also had slurred/thick tongued speech. She refused to perform field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
Defense:	Under Florida law, a breath test can only be requested after arrest. Here, the officer asked for a breath test prior to arrest. Thus, the defendant's refusal to provide a breath test would have been inadmissible. Also, the officer never gave the defendant any adverse consequences when she refused roadside tests. Thus, her refusal to perform field sobriety tests would have also been inadmissible. The state Dropped the defendant's second DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 17, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-032878	Judge Babb
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for traveling at a slow rate of speed and leaving the roadway twice into the grass. Upon contact, the officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and watery eyes. She stumbled, staggered, swayed, and was clumsy. She admitted she should not have been driving. She performed poorly on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .126 and a .125 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The lawfulness of the traffic stop was called into question. Here, no traffic was affected by her slow driving and the leaving the road two times. She also did not endanger anyone with her driving. Thus, there was no probable cause to effect the traffic stop. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 17, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-030556	Judge Babb
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, a flushed/red face, and bloodshot eyes. The defendant could not recall how much alcohol he had drank. After performing the roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .144 and a .140 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The defendant was coerced into taking a breath test. Specifically, the officer told him that if he blew under a .08, he would only get a ticket. The defendant was led to believe that he could be released from custody if he agreed to blow in to the machine. An officer cannot dangle freedom when trying to obtain a breath test. One will not be unarrested once taken in to the jail after being arrested for DUI. Thus, the breath test results would have been excluded.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 17, 2019	Case: 2019-CF-035695	Judge Koenig
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, glassy/bloodshot eyes, and he admitted to having consumed two beers. After performing the HGN (eye test), one leg stand, and walk and turn exercises, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. In a search subsequent to arrest, the officer also discovered cocaine and the defendant as charged with felony possession.
Defense:	In order to lawfully request a defendant to perform roadside tasks, there must reasonable suspicion of a crime. In other words, there must be some evidence that the defendant was impaired. Here, there was no erratic driving, no balance issues, and no speech issues. Thus, all the field sobriety test would have been inadmissible. The State Dropped the DUI and firm is working on trying to get the felony dismissed.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 16, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-005001	Judge Mcneil
Facts:	The defendant was found passed out in his car at a gas pump. It took numerous attempts to try to awaken the defendant. Upon awakening the defendant, the officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glossy eyes. After performing the field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The officers’ reports were very vaguely written. The video of the defendant contradicted many of the observations on the reports. The week before trial, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 15, 2019	Case: 2493-XBG	Judge Nunez
Facts:	The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash. Officers noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, thick tongued speech, and he was stumbling around. He also swayed and admitted to having drank beer. He 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:	Although the defendant performed the walk and turn, one leg stand, and HGN (eye test), nothing was captured on video tape. All the officers had body worn cameras but not one roadside task was on tape. This lack of evidence was presented to the State and they Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Oct 15, 2019	Case: 18-028556MU10A	Judge Gottlieb
Facts:	The police received a call regarding an intoxicated woman who just left a bar. At the same time, a call was placed to 911 regarding a female who was being followed by a man. The police located both vehicles with the woman parked on the side of the road with the engine running. The officer approached the female and observed characteristics of impairment. Specifically, he observed a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, as well as slurred speech. The initial officer called for a DUI task force officer. The DUI officer arrived and conducted field sobriety tests. The defendant was arrested and blew .087 in the breath machine. In addition, the defendant provided a urine sample and tested positive for three (3) controlled substances.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton filed a motion to compel the 911 call. It was later revealed that the 911 call was destroyed. Depositions were taken from both officers. In deposition, the officers agreed that they should have investigated the male who was parked behind the defendant. Parks and Braxton filed a motion to dismiss based on a necessity defense. Specifically, the defendant was legally entitled to commit a DUI in order to avoid the greater harm of being assaulted by the man who was following her. The Prosecutor agreed and subsequently dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.