Feb 10, 2020	Case: 19-021218MU10A	Judge Evans
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for both speeding and weaving. He admitted to drinking three beers and had slurred speech. In addition, the officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes and a flushed face. The defendant refused to perform any field sobriety tests or a breath test. A few months after this case, the defendant was arrested again on a new charge of DUI. The prosecutor filed a motion to revoke the defendant's bond and have him incarcerated. Counsel presented the video which contradicted many of the officer's conclusions.
Defense:	Rather than revoke the defendant's bond, the prosecutor agreed to drop the DUI on the first case. The second case is still pending.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 10, 2020	Case: 19-CF-009983	Judge K. Fernandez
Facts:	The defendant was the at fault driver in a traffic crash whereby he left the scene. When officers finally caught him, they observed the defendant to have slow/slurred speech, and constricted pupils. He also had blood shot eyes, swayed, and was nodding off. The officers believed he was impaired by a chemical or controlled substance. He then performed very poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, officers found liquid, which they believed to be liquid hydrocodone, to which the defendant did not have a prescription. He was he was also charged with Felony possession. This was also the defendant's Second DUI.
Defense:	First, the firm was able to prove that the drug was not hydrocodone and the officers were wrong. The felony was Dismissed. Also, to convict a defendant of DUI, one has to be impaired by alcohol and/or a chemical and/or a controlled substance. Here, the State could not prove what substance (i.e. not hydrocodone) was impairing the defendant. The State Dropped the defendant's Second DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 7, 2020	Case: 2019-CT-504346	Judge Gonzalez
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for running a stop sign. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, watery/bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. She stated she had consumed two glasses of wine and appeared unsteady. After performing the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand exercises, she was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .102 and a .101 in the breath machine.
Defense:	When the NHTSA manual on roadside tests was created, it stated that an officer should use caution or not even administer the walk and turn or one leg stand to to individuals 60 years old or older. Here, the officer administered those difficult physical tests to a defendant who was almost 70 years old. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 4, 2020	Case: 19-MM-007569	Judge Collins
Facts:	The defendant was seen by civilians driving erratically and into oncoming traffic. When officers arrived, they observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and blood shot eyes. The defendant stated she had consumed 2-3 mixed drinks. After performing the field sobriety tests, she was arrested for DUI.
Defense:	When officers arrived, the defendant was outside her car. Since there was no crash, the arrest was unlawful under Florida Statute 901.15 as no officer saw her behind the wheel.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 4, 2020	Case: 19-CT-001164	Judge Bell
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving erratically. He ran a stop sign, rolled past a stop bar, weaved, and almost caused a crash. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he admitted to having 2-3 beers. He performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew .186, .147, and .168 in the breath machine.
Defense:	Only two breath samples are required in the State of Florida. Here, the machine was having issues and three were obtained. Two of them were outside the margin of error.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Feb 4, 2020	Case: 19-CT-007727	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding and swerving. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he had fumbling fingers. The defendant had bloodshot eyes and admitted to having consumed a couple of glasses of wine. He performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The officer's reports exaggerated the defendant's level of impairment as compared to the video tape. The firm pointed out all the specific details to the prosecutor. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 28, 2020	Case: 19-021238MU10A	Judge Levy
Facts:	The defendant was speeding and was the at fault drier in a head on collision. Upon arrival, officers observed a strong odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and unsteadiness. On video, the defendant dropped his paperwork multiple times. The defendant complained of chest injuries and was taken to the hospital. At the hospital, a DUI officer conducted an investigation and through the interview process the defendant acknowledged to drinking 4 beers. He later refused a blood test and admitted he might he might be over the legal limit. He was arrested for DUI. This was the defendant's Second offense.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton retrieved a second video. The second video revealed a DUI investigation of the victim in the crash. The State acknowledged the lack of credibility of their wheel witness and dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 28, 2020	Case: 19-CT-502728	Judge Hayward
Facts:	The defendant crashed his car into a ditch. When officers arrived, they observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glossy eyes. He also swayed while he stood and appeared off balance. He told the officers under oath that a few individuals tried to rob him and there was a struggle which caused him to roll the car into the ditch. The defendant refused to perform the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's third DUI and second refusal charge.
Defense:	Under the legal doctrine of corpus delicti, there must be substantial independent evidence of a crime, other than the defendant's statements. Here, the State could not prove that the defendant was the driver other than his statement admitting to rolling the car into the ditch. The State Dismissed the defendant's Third DUI and also the refusal charge.
Result:	The DUI was dismissed.

Jan 27, 2020	Case: 19-CT-035684	Judge Ingram
Facts:	An anonymous person told the police that the defendant was passing in out of consciousness at a red light. The officer made contact with her and smelled an odor of alcohol. He also observed glassy eyes, slurred/mumbled speech, and she swayed as she stood. She refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
Defense:	Parks and Braxton filed pretrial motions to suppress evidence. The first motion was that the defendant was never given any adverse consequences when she refused field sobriety tests. Also, under Florida law, a request for a breath test must be incident to lawful arrest. Here, the officer asked for a breath test on video tape prior to her arrest. The firm then filed a motion to exclude the refusal to provide breath sample. Prior to any motion hearings, the State Dropped the defendant's Second DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 24, 2020	Case: 2019-CT-017464	Judge Bonavita
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. He also had an orbital sway. According to the officer, he failed the field sobriety tests, and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI within five years.
Defense:	In the NHTSA manual on roadside tests, it states that the area where roadside tests are performed must be level. In the police reports, the officer wrote that the area was level where he had the defendant do the walk and turn and one leg stand. However, the defense pointed out to the State that the parking lot area where they were performed was on a big slope. This was captured on tape. Thus, the roadsides were conducted in violation of the manual. The State Dropped the defendant's Second DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 24, 2020	Case: 19-CT-039783	Judge Jacobus
Facts:	Officers saw the defendant as his car was stuck in a grassy drainage ditch. Officers observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he was staggering. The defendant's movements were slow, lethargic, and he also stated he had drank three beers and two shots. The defendant refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI.
Defense:	There was no proof that the defendant had driven while under the influence of alcohol because time had passed while the vehicle was stuck in the ditch and it was not operable when the police arrived.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 22, 2020	Case: 19-CT-013937	Judge Myers
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving with no headlights and no taillights. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot/watery eyes. After performing the roadside tasks, she was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she blew a .123 and a .117 in the breath machine.
Defense:	Under the theory of absorption and elimination of alcohol, called retrograde extrapolation, the firm was able to put the defendants breath alcohol level under a .08 at the time of driving.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 22, 2020	Case: 19-CT-010416	Judge Gutman
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving without his headlights activated. The defendant had an odor of alcohol, lethargic movements, and glassy eyes. After performing poorly on roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .180 and a .176 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The firm was able to show that the officer's video contradicted the officer's reports. Thus, the officer's credibility was called into question.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 20, 2020	Case: 18-036103MU10A	Judge Solomon
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding, running a red light, and running a stop sign. Officers smelled an odor of alcohol as well as an odor of marijuana. They observed bloodshot eyes and slurred speech. He performed very poorly on the video taped roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath and urine tests.
Defense:	The defendant suffers from ADHD, whereby many of the characteristics he exhibits mirror the effects of alcohol impairment. Despite the fact that the defendant's performance on the field sobriety tests were less than perfect, the defendant's medical history proved as a good explanation for the impairment. The State dropped the DUI and he received no conviction.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 14, 2020	Case: 19-021210MU10A	Judge Pole
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and red/glassy eyes. He also noticed the defendant swaying. The defendant had a flushed face and difficulty locating his registration, which was in his hand. The defendant performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The video was inconsistent with the police reports and testimony of the officer. The State Dropped the DUI and he received no conviction.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 10, 2020	Case: 2019-CT-011168	Judge Harper for Cunningham
Facts:	The defendant was involved in a crash at a fast food restaurant parking lot. He fled the scene and went back to his neighborhood. The tag on his vehicle was run after police were called and they tracked him down. He was sitting on the ground next to the vehicle in question. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, extremely slurred/not understandable speech, and bloodshot eyes. He was unsteady, lethargic, and very argumentative. He refused to perform field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He was also charged with leaving the scene of an accident and willfully refusing to sign the DUI citation.
Defense:	Parks and Braxton pointed out to the State that the victim of the alleged crash stated that the truck was red in the 911 call. However, the truck the defendant was found sitting next to was blue. Thus, the caller's credibility about being able to actually ID the defendant as the driver was called into question. We also provided pictures to the State showing no damage. Thus, there was no "accident" as defined by case law. Therefore, the defendant could not have left the scene of an accident. If there was no actual crash initially as defined by the case law, the defendant was then being unlawfully detained by the police. The State Dropped the DUI and Dismissed all the other charges.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 8, 2020	Case: 19-CT-007318	Judge Jeske
Facts:	The defendant was the at fault driver whereby he hit two parked cars. The officers observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He swayed as he stood and was not making any sense in his statements to police. He refused to do roadside tests and was arrested for DUI.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton provided pictures to the State of the defendant's windshield after the crash, showing it had been shattered. The defendant's head had slammed into the windshield. Thus any impairment could have been as equally attributable to the crash versus alcohol. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 7, 2020	Case: 2019-CT-013350	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glassy eyes. His face was flushed, his dexterity poor, and he kept wetting his lips. He also had a flushed face and was unsteady. He refused to perform the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The video contradicted the officer’s reports. The defendant did not appear unsteady and his speech appeared normal. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 7, 2020	Case: 2019-CT-003125	Judge Jeske
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol and he admitted to having drank two cocktails. He then performed the field sobriety tests such as the one leg stand and walk and turn. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	An officer must have reasonable suspicion of a crime in order to request roadside tests. The officer must have specific facts that the defendant was impaired. A mere odor of alcohol is not enough with no erratic driving. Thus, all the roadside tests could have been excluded. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Jan 7, 2020	Case: 19-CT-013229	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was stopped after an officer said the defendant cut him off. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. According to the officer, he failed the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
Defense:	The officer exaggerated the level of impairment in the roadside reports as compared to the video tape. The State dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.