Aug 31, 2021	Case: 20-CT-038546	Judge Friedland
Facts:	The defendant was rear ended by another car. When officers arrived, they noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, mumbled speech, and red/glassy eyes. The defendant was then taken to the hospital where she refused to provide a blood sample. She was then charged with DUI. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
Defense:	The officers’ reports contradicted each other. In one report, he wrote that the defendant had mumbled speech, but in another one he wrote the defendant had good speech. Due to the fact that the defendant was not the cause of crash, no roadsides were conducted, and the officer's credibility was called into question, there was a lack of probable cause to arrest the defendant. The State Dropped the defendant's Second DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 30, 2021	Case: 21-CT-007232	Judge Damico
Facts:	A caller dialed 911 stating that the defendant was driving all over the road and speeding. When the officer spotted the defendant, he also observed weaving and speeding. Upon coming in contact with the defendant after the traffic stop, he observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, thick tongued speech, and watery eyes. He also appeared unsteady. After refusing to perform roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The defendant stated he had major back issues which would have contributed to any unsteadiness. In addition, his speech was not slurred on tape.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 30, 2021	Case: 21-CT-006470	Judge Damico
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for swerving in and out of traffic and almost hitting a house after a 911 caller relayed what they had seen. Upon contact, the officers noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and slow dexterity. She was unstable, her speech was mumbled, and she had slow comprehension. She performed poorly on the roadside tests such as the walk and turn and one leg stand. She was then arrested for DUI and later blew .166, .134, and .145 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The officer did not see any driving pattern upon stopping the defendant. Thus, he had no corroboration to legally justify the traffic stop. Thus, the lawfulness of the traffic stop was called into question.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 19, 2021	Case: 21-CT-002716	Judge Moses-Stephens
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding, weaving, and almost striking a police car. Officers observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and a hard time locating his documents. He also stated he had drank 4 to 5 beers. After performing various field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .166 and a .164 in the breath machine.
Defense:	English is not the defendant's first language. Officers made no attempts to get an interpreter to assist in the DUI investigation so the defendant could properly understand.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 18, 2021	Case: 20-CT-055614	Judge Jacobus
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving all over the road, almost hitting a parked vehicle, and following too closely. Upon contact, officers observed convoluted and confusing statements. His eyes fluttered and they were glassy. The defendant was very aggressive and belligerent with the officers. After refusing roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI as the officers concluded he was impaired by drugs and not alcohol. He later refused breath and urine tests.
Defense:	Under Florida DUI statute 316.193, the State must prove that a defendant is impaired by a specific chemical and/or controlled substance. One just can’t be impaired by something. The State could not prove the case and Dropped the DUI. The defendant received no criminal conviction.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 18, 2021	Case: 21-CT-010035	Judge T. Brown
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. He also had a flushed face and had a sway to his stance. The defendant admitted to having dank wine. After performing various field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .146 and a .140 in the breath machine.
Defense:	Due to many inconsistencies in the evidence, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 18, 2021	Case: 21-CT-018173	Judge T. Brown
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for excessive speed and failing to maintain her lane of travel. Officers noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and slurred speech. She had difficulty maintain her balance and swayed while standing. After performing roadside tests such as the one leg stand and walk and turn, she was arrested for DUI.
Defense:	Many observations such as slurred speech and balance issues were contradicted by the defendant's video tape. This was brought to the State's attention by the firm. The State Dropped the DUI and the defendant received no criminal conviction on her record.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 17, 2021	Case: 20-CT-009003	Judge Jeske
Facts:	The defendant was involved in a traffic crash after he wiped out on his motorcycle and slid into another car. When officers arrived, they observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he stumbled on his feet. He also had glassy/watery eyes. The defendant refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI arrest.
Defense:	When asking the defendant to perform roadside tests, the officer misstated the law by telling him that one consents to roadsides when they get their driver's license. Under Florida law, the only thing that pertains to one's consent when they get a driver's license is a breath, urine, or blood test.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 17, 2021	Case: 20-CT-009314	Judge Jeske
Facts:	The defendant was observed by the officer sitting in her car with the engine running behind a business establishment. Police responded to a call about a mentally ill person. When officers made contact with the defendant, they observed an odor of alcohol, numerous cans of alcohol that were crushed and empty, difficulty following directions, and slurred speech. She also gave unusual and inconsistent statements. She then performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test.
Defense:	On tape, officers had made statements to each other on the body cameras about whether the defendant was impaired by a mental illness or alcohol. This was not written in any police reports. Had the firm not watched the tapes, it never would have been discovered or brought to the prosecutor's attention. Thus, there was reasonable doubt as to whether she was impaired by alcohol or a mental illness.
Result:	The DUI was dismissed.

Aug 10, 2021	Case: 20-CT-005801	Judge Gutman
Facts:	The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash. When officers arrived, they noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/watery eyes, he appeared unsteady on his feet, and had slurred speech. After refusing to perform roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	On tape, the defendant's speech did not appear to sound slurred and he did not appear off balance or unsteady.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 10, 2021	Case: 20-CT-007979	Judge Gutman
Facts:	The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant also struggled to find her documents. She refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test. This was her Second DUI and also Second refusal.
Defense:	At the civil administrative DMV hearing, the officer testified under oath how the defendant was practically a falling down drunk. This testimony was contradicted by the video tape. The State Dropped her Second DUI and dismissed the refusal charge.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Aug 9, 2021	Case: 21-CT-004306	Judge Damico
Facts:	A caller dialed 911 saying that that the defendant was involved in a hit and run crash. When officers stopped the defendant, they observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/watery eyes, and slurred speech. He then performed 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 the breath test.
Defense:	Due to a lack of specifies on the police reports as to the field sobriety tests, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 29, 2021	Case: 20-CT-012168	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant crashed her car into a mailbox then post. When officers arrived, they noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. She fumbled around with her paperwork and was very unsteady. After performing various roadside tasks, she was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test.
Defense:	Many aspects of the video tape contradicted by the police reports.
Result:	The State Dropped the DUI.

Jul 29, 2021	Case: 21-CT-001396	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. Officers noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and slurred speech. He also had a red face and appeared disoriented. After performing field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .150 and a .132 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The defendant's performance on video tape during the field sobriety test clearly showed that he was lower than .08 at the time of driving. Thus, he would have be absorbing alcohol when he blew into the machine.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 29, 2021	Case: 20-CT-004465	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was observed by an officer stumbling into a Waffle House. He noticed the defendant stumble, have slurred speech, and acting belligerent. The defendant then entered his car and drove off. Contact was made with the defendant at a gas station. Similar observations were made by police and he was asked to perform roadside tasks as officers believed he was impaired by drugs, and not alcohol. He performed very poorly and was arrested for DUI. He provided a urine sample which revealed Xanax and Marijuana once analyzed by FDLE.
Defense:	The State could not prove how long the substances had been in his system. Thus, they couldn't prove he was actually impaired by those drugs.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 19, 2021	Case: 21-CT-010035	Judge Garagozlo
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/glassy eyes, and she appeared disoriented and confused. When asked how much she had to drink, she responded "not that much." Her speech was slurred and she also appeared clumsy. She consented to perform field sobriety tests such as the walk and turn and one leg stand. She was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	Many observations of the defendant's performance on the roadside tests were very vaguely written and hardly any specifics included.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 19, 2021	Case: AD0B9EE	Judge Vaccaro
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving without headlights. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and he admitted to having drank two drinks. After performing roadside tests on video, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. Prior to trial, we pointed out to the State that there was no probable cause to even arrest the defendant based on the video tape. Prior to trial, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 16, 2021	Case: 21-CT-002688	Judge Denkin
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for nearly crashing into other vehicles. The officers observed an odor of alcohol, thick tongued speech, and she was slurring her words. After performing poorly on roadside tests, she was arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	Due to inconsistencies in the reports pointed out by the defense, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 15, 2021	Case: 21-CT-015462	Judge Silverman
Facts:	The defendant was the at fault driver in a crash. The defendant had glassy eyes, slurred speech, and difficulty answering questions. The defendant was off balance and almost fell over. Believing that she was impaired by drugs, the defendant was asked to perform roadside tests. She refused and was arrested for DUI. She later refused a urine test.
Defense:	An officer can only request a breath and/or urine test after one has been arrested. Here, the officer read her implied consent and requested a urine test prior to arresting her which was unlawful. Thus, her refusal to provide a urine sample would have been excluded from evidence. In addition, the State could not prove by what specific chemical and/or or controlled substance was allegedly impairing the defendant as required by Florida DUI Statute 316.193. . The State Dropped the DUI to a civil careless infraction.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jul 14, 2021	Case: 20-CT-504148	Judge George
Facts:	The defendant was the at fault driver when she hit a bus from behind. Officers observed slow/sluggish speech, her movements were slow, and she had watery eyes. The defendant admitted to having taken her prescription medicines. Believing she was impaired by a chemical and/or controlled substance, she was asked to perform field sobriety tests. She was then arrested for DUI. At the station, another officer who is a DRE (drug recognition expert) was called in to perform a DRE exam on her to determine what class of drugs was allegedly impairing her. She also provided a urine sample which later came back from FLDE positive for amphetamines.
Defense:	The observations both the arresting officer and the DRE officer made were inconsistent with someone being impaired by amphetamines. In fact, the DRE officer concluded that she was impaired by a CNS Depressant which was not only wrong, but on the opposite spectrum of amphetamines. Someone who is impaired by amphetamines will appear euphoric and excited and not slow and sluggish. In addition, someone who is impaired by amphetamines will not exhibit HGN (the eyes test), nor have equal pupil size, like the defendant did. In addition, when the officer administered the roadside tests, he covered his body worn camera with his forearm and clip board so one could not even see the defendant's performance.
Result:	The State Dismissed the DUI a week prior to the trial date.