On 7/30/12, Client was stopped for driving with a suspended license. Client had been previously convicted of driving with a suspended license and one more conviction would have definitely habitualized him resulting in a future felony conviction on his record. On 11/21/12, the case ws scheduled for trial and the officer appeared for court. Counsel convinced the State of Florida to drop the charge.
A police officer approached the Defendant and noticed the strong smell of burnt cannabis. The Defendant admitted to possessing a small amount of marijuana, and was subsequently arrested. The attorney for the firm investigated the case, and was able to get the Defendant into a drug treatment program. Upon completion of the program, the attorney for the firm was able to get the State to drop the case completely.
The Defendant was seen by an officer running a red light. He was pulled over and the stopping officer smelled alcohol on the Defendant’s breath and his eyes were bloodshot, watery and glassy. He was unsteady on his feet and a DUI unit was called to respond to the scene. He admitted to drinking about 5 beers and then stated he did not want to do the roadsides because he was “too drunk” and asked “to be taken right to jail.” After continually asking the Defendant if he wanted to perform roadsides, he stated, “No, I am drunk, it would be a waste of time.” He then refused to perform roadside exercises and was taken to jail. At the jail, the Defendant refused to provide a sample of his breath and when asked to sign his tickets, he also refused. The firm took several sworn statements from the officers and filed a motion to suppress after discovering issues regarding the Defendant being placed in handcuffs. These issues did not appear in any of the police reports. The Firm argued the Defendant was “arrested” under certain legal principles although he was not “formally arrested.” On the date of the hearing on the motion to suppress, the State of Florida dismissed the charges for Driving Under the Influence, Driving Under Suspension and Refusing to Sign the Traffic Summons.
The Defendant was charged with 4 separate counts of DUI causing Property Damage. The Defendant was involved in a multi-vehicle accident located at State Road 84 and Davie Road in Davie, Florida. Officers arrived on scene and noticed the Defendant to have the odor of an alcoholic beverage on his breath, bloodshot glassy eyes and admitted to consuming alcohol at Bokamper’s Bar and Grille in Plantation after stating to another officer that he had nothing to drink and that he was coming from K-Mart. The Defendant was asked to participate in Roadside Sobriety Exercises, but refused to do so citing numerous injuries and surgeries to his back and to his knees. The Defendant was arrested for DUI and refused to submit to a breath test. The firm filed a Motion to Suppress the Unlawful Detention of the Defendant for roadside exercises based upon the fact that the DUI investigator compelled the Defendant to participate in a roadside investigation for DUI after noticing only that the Defendant’s eyes were red. The State received the motion and dropped all DUI charges.
The Client was charged with Driving Under the Influence after she was stopped for serving all over the road and into oncoming traffic. The client had watery eyes and the smell of an unknown alcoholic beverage emitting from her breath. According to the arresting officer, the client was asked to submit to field sobriety exercises which according to the officer she failed to perform to standard. The Client admitted to having one and a half glasses of wine. She subsequently gave a breath sample of .042 and .043. Despite the State Attorney continuing the case twice, the Firm pushed for trial and on the day of trial call, the State of Florida dismissed the DUI.
The Client was charged with Driving Under the Influence after she was stopped for serving all over the road and into oncoming traffic. The client had watery eyes and the smell of an unknown alcoholic beverage emitting from her breath. According to the arresting officer, the client was asked to submit to field sobriety exercises which according to the officer she failed to perform to standard. The Client admitted to having one and a half glasses of wine. She subsequently gave a breath sample of .042 and .043. Despite the State Attorney continuing the case twice, the Firm pushed for trial and on the day of trial call, the State of Florida dismissed the DUI.
The Defendant was passed out in her vehicle on the southbound exit ramp of I-95 and Boynton Beach Boulevard. An independent witness called the police who responded. When an FHP DUI officer arrived, he noticed that she smelled like alcohol and her eyes were bloodshot. Because the area was not conducive to roadsides, the Defendant was moved to the Holiday INN parking lot about 200 feet away. She performed poorly on roadsides and was arrested. While at the jail, she gave two breath samples of .168 and .173. The firm filed a motion to exclude the roadsides because the Trooper did not record the exercises even though he had a working camera. The firm retrieved the FHP policies on videotaping and set the motion for a hearing. At the hearing, the Officer had brought several pictures of the Holiday Inn parking lot depicting what the officer claimed to be “an area that would not allow him to record.” He tried to convince the court that he purposely did not record the roadsides due to an inability to capture them. After being cross examined by the Firm, the court granted the motion, indicating on the record that parts of the officer’s testimony was “offensive.” After the hearing, the State Attorney’s Office dismissed the charges for Driving Under the Influence.
The Defendant was passed out in her vehicle on the southbound exit ramp of I-95 and Boynton Beach Boulevard. An independent witness called the police who responded. When an FHP DUI officer arrived, he noticed that she smelled like alcohol and her eyes were bloodshot. Because the area was not conducive to roadsides, the Defendant was moved to the Holiday INN parking lot about 200 feet away. She performed poorly on roadsides and was arrested. While at the jail, she gave two breath samples of .168 and .173. The firm filed a motion to exclude the roadsides because the Trooper did not record the exercises even though he had a working camera. The firm retrieved the FHP policies on videotaping and set the motion for a hearing. At the hearing, the Officer had brought several pictures of the Holiday Inn parking lot depicting what the officer claimed to be “an area that would not allow him to record.” He tried to convince the court that he purposely did not record the roadsides due to an inability to capture them. After being cross examined by the Firm, the court granted the motion, indicating on the record that parts of the officer’s testimony was “offensive.” After the hearing, the State Attorney’s Office dismissed the charges for Driving Under the Influence.
The police had received a call from an unknown driver indicating that a dark colored pickup truck was driving recklessly on Flamingo Road, and had nearly hit several vehicles. An officer arrived to the area and saw a dark colored pickup truck pulled along the side of the road. The officer approached, but could not see inside of the vehicle, so he opened the door. The Defendant was slumped over in the driver’s seat with the vehicle running. The officer noticed a very strong odor of alcohol coming from the Defendant’s mouth. The officer asked the Defendant to perform 3 roadside exercises, and the Defendant performed poorly on all 3. The Defendant agreed to submit to a breath test and blew nearly twice the legal limit. The attorney for the firm argued a motion to suppress the initial stop of the Defendant. The Court granted the motion and the case was dismissed.
The client was charged with DUI. The officers on the scene testified that he was staggering while he walked, had slurred speech and beer cans strewn all around the vehicle. After the client did not perform field sobriety exercises he was asked to give a breath sample, to which he replied that he would do whatever the officers wanted. The officers processed this as a refusal to take the test and at this point the client got very upset and began cursing and kicking the police cruiser. The firm was able to get the refusal suspension of the client’s license lifted by the DMV at the client’s formal hearing as there was no actual refusal. In addition, the Firm used the testimony given at the formal DMV hearing and showed it to the State Attorney’s office shortly before trial. The State agreed to drop the DUI charge.
The client was charged with DUI. The officers on the scene testified that he was staggering while he walked, had slurred speech and beer cans strewn all around the vehicle. After the client did not perform field sobriety exercises he was asked to give a breath sample, to which he replied that he would do whatever the officers wanted. The officers processed this as a refusal to take the test and at this point the client got very upset and began cursing and kicking the police cruiser. The firm was able to get the refusal suspension of the client’s license lifted by the DMV at the client’s formal hearing as there was no actual refusal. In addition, the Firm used the testimony given at the formal DMV hearing and showed it to the State Attorney’s office shortly before trial. The State agreed to drop the DUI charge.
Our client was stopped at a red light. When the light turned green, she was hit from behind. When the officer arrived, he noticed our client had slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and was argumentative. When they checked her vehicle, they found an empty thermos that smelled of alcohol. She was transported to the hospital for observation and refused a request for a blood sample. Our firm refused all offers and the State eventually dismissed the charge completely.
