RECENT COURT VICTORIES

On March 7, 2026, 911 dispatch received a call from a bouncer at a local bar stating there was an intoxicated individual driving off from the bar.  An officer was in the area and located the vehicle matching the description of the call and followed the car as it swerved between lanes.

The officer initiated a stop and observed the odor of alcoholic beverages and blood shot and watery eyes.  The driver agreed to perform field sobriety exercises using a translator and exhibited numerous indicators of impairment. Upon arrest, the driver refused a breath sample.

After deposing the arresting officer, it was determined that she initiated the traffic stop outside of her jurisdiction and the case and accompanying traffic infraction were dismissed.

On March 13, 2026, the Tallahassee Police Department responded to a multiple vehicle accident. Upon arrival to the scene, the officers came upon the driver outside of the vehicle that was and started their initial accident investigation. During the course of their investigation, they noticed signs of impairment, including leaning against his car for balance, slurred speech, and glossy eyes.

Based upon these observations, the police requested the driver to submit roadside sobriety tasks. After submitting to the roadside tasks, the officers believed that the driver was under the influence of drugs or alcohol and placed under arrest for driving under the influence.  After hiring the attorney's from the Ticket Clinic, the Driving Under the Influence charges were dismissed.

On November 25, 2025, our client was arrested for DUI after a deputy claimed he was unable to maintain his lane of travel. However, based on case law and Florida Statute 316.089(1), our Attorney filed a motion to suppress the entire stop, arguing that there was no probable cause for a traffic infraction and therefore, he was illegally seized. Before even scheduling the motion to suppress for a hearing, the State offered to reduce the DUI charge to a reckless driving charge. The client happily accepted and resolved his case on August 20th, 2026.

On July 27, 2026 our client was stopped for an illegal u-turn.  Upon making contact with the driver, the police officer noticed that the driver was acting nervous and had a white residue around his mouth. The driver was asked to exit the car and a DUI investigation ensued. At the conclusion, our client was not arrested for DUI. However, the police did ask for permission to search the car. The driver consented.  Behind the driver's seat was cold beer in a plastic shopping bag. The police officer moved the bag and found what appeared to be a bag of cocaine underneath the bag of beer.  The Defendant did not admit to possessing the drugs but did admit to placing the beer in the rear seat. The police presumed that our client knew that the drugs were there, without any significant proof.  The passenger was in possession of marijuana but was not charged. The driver was arrested for cocaine possession. Post Miranda warnings, the driver did admit to using cocaine recreationally.  To further complicate the case, the Defendant was already out on bond for another criminal case.  At the bond hearing, the State wanted to revoke the previous bond but Ticket Clinic lawyers were able to prevent that and our client was released without any monetary bond.  Ticket Clinic lawyers began working on the new felony and immediately contacted the case filing attorney at the State Attorney's office in an attempt to highlight the weaknesses in the case.  After a lengthy review, the State decided to drop the entire case.

On July 2, 2026, the Charlotte County Sheriff observed a vehicle approaching at an extremely high rate of speed. The Sherrif initiated a vehicle stop.  At the initial contact, a strong odor of burnt marijuana was detected. The Sheriff began a DUI investigation. During the course of their investigation, they noticed signs of impairment including slow and slurred speech, red, bloodshot and watery eyes, and difficulty responding to questions.

Based upon these observations, the police requested that the driver to submit roadside sobriety tasks. After submitting to the roadside tasks, the officers believed that the driver was under the influence of drugs or alcohol and placed under arrest for driving under the influence.  After hiring the attorneys from the Ticket Clinic, the Driving Under the Influence charges were dismissed.

Our Client was charged with dangerous excessive speeding, specifically driving at 102 MPH in a 65 MPH zone.  Because we knew the State could not win the trial, the case was set for a jury trial.  On the morning of jury trial, the State amended the crime of dangerous excessive speeding to the civil infraction of 102 MPH in a 65 MPH zone.  We immediately moved to dismiss the case, arguing that since the Trooper never provided all the evidence (speed documents) to the State, the Trooper should not be provided a second bite at the apple.  The Court agreed and dismissed the case.

In May 19, 2025, our client was arrested for a DUI while parked in a closed fast-food business. He was parked at the door just before the drive through speaker. During the night, a Port St. Lucie Officer observed the parked car in the closed business. Later in the night, he observed the same car in the same position as parked. The officer elected to pull him over using his red and blue lights to conduct an investigation. Because of this, the client was stopped inappropriately. After the attorney from The Ticket Clinic filed a motion to suppress, the State reduced the charge to reckless driving in which he was happy to accept. The case closed July 30, 2026.

A deputy with the Orange County Sheriff’s Office arrested our client for DUI after alleging he was driving without headlights, drifting out of his lane, and showing signs of impairment. The agency later reported breath‑test results of 0.146 and 0.148 at the county’s DUI testing facility. After navigating the legal process and completing the DUI diversion program, our client’s case was fully dismissed. This solid outcome protects his record and his future.

Our client was arrested for DUI after being involved in a two-car crash. During the crash investigation, the officer claimed our client exhibited signs of impairment—slurred speech, bloodshot and glassy eyes, and a strong odor of an alcoholic beverage. He advised our client that the crash investigation was complete, and he would be investigated for DUI.   During the DUI investigation, the client admitted to drinking one beer and two mixed drinks.  The client refused to participate in field sobriety exercises and was arrested for DUI. He declined to provide a breath sample. He was charged with DUI and Refusal to Submit to a Breath Test.

Despite these allegations, the State produced only video footage of our client being transported to jail and refusing to provide a breath sample. The arrest report, however, stated that body-worn camera footage captured all pre-arrest activity. Recognizing the significance of the missing evidence, our attorney set the case for trial and filed a motion to compel its production or, alternatively, to limit testimony concerning events that should have been documented on the missing video.

Prior to trial, the State reduced the DUI charge to alcohol-related reckless driving and dismissed the Breath Test Refusal charge entirely. In exchange, our client agreed to pay a fine and complete community service, with no probation and no driver's license suspension.