The Defendant was seen driving on a closed golf course late at night. His car could be seen jumping up and down over the hills on the course. As he pulled out, he was stopped by an officer where he told the officer “you caught me.” That officer noticed that the defendant’s eyes were bloodshot and glassy, his speech was slurred and he had an odor of alcohol coming from his breath. A DUI officer was ordered to respond. That officer noticed that the Defendant’s face was flushed, he was sweating and his mouth was dry with white residue on the corners of his mouth. He admitted that he had a whisky drink earlier. After asking him to step out of the car, roadside tasks were requested from the Defendant. The Defendant’s eyes were checked by the first officer before the start of the roadsides. During the roadsides, the Defendant asked “Am I going for DUI?” The Defendant was cooperative at first but then became angry and uncooperative with mood swings. According to the arresting officer, the Defendant performed poorly on the roadsides. These were all recorded and on video. After roadsides were completed, the arresting officer and 2 other officers conversed on the video. They could be seen talking but the audio was muted (which the arresting officer admitted to doing in a sworn deposition). Two separate officers then checked the Defendant’s eyes again. One of the officers on scene testified in a sworn deposition that he was ordered by his Sergeant to take notes and follow this arresting officer during his DUI investigations. He said he turned those notes over to the Seargant. After the Firm filed a motion to compel those notes, the State of Florida indicated that they did not exist. None of the officers would divulge what conversation took place during the muted portion of the video. The Defendant was then taken into custody and taken to the Breath Alcohol Testing Facility where he refused to give a sample of his breath. The Firm filed a Motion to Dismiss based upon Procedural Due Process Grounds arguing that the State of Florida purposely destroyed and concealed exculpatory evidence due to the Officer’s actions. After reviewing all of the depositions and the entire case, the State of Florida agreed and dismissed the charges for Driving Under the Influence.
A Martin County resident was involved in a serious crash when she drove her car underneath a tractor trailer. She received a serious head injury and had to be excavated from her car. A Florida Highway Patrol Trooper alleged that the defendant showed signs of impairment including a strong odor of alcohol and bloodshot eyes. At the hospital, the trooper requested the driver to provide a sample of her blood so that it could be analyzed for alcohol. The driver refused. The trooper eventually filed a warrant for her arrest charging her with DUI. Once hiring The Ticket Clinic, the Firm’s Treasure Coast Attorney, Stephen Smith, immediately demanded a speedy trial. In response, the Prosecutor scrambled to subpoena the client’s medical records from the hospital to gain evidence of her blood alcohol content. In response, counsel filed legal documents that sought to prevent the prosecutor from obtaining the medical records under the client’s right of privacy. The prosecutor was unable to obtain any evidence of the client’s blood alcohol content and therefore offered to amend the charge to reckless driving if the client agreed to resolve the case. The client refused the offer upon the advice of counsel. As predicted by counsel, on the day of the trial, the prosecutor Dismissed the DUI which completely Exonerated our client.
Client was stopped for a traffic infraction. When the officer approached, he was overwhelmed by the smell of marijuana coming from the inside of the vehicle. The officer asked our client to step out of the vehicle. When he did, the officer claims he dropped a clear baggie on the street containing marijuana . A search of the vehicle revealed more marijuana in rolling papers. He was charged with possession of marijuana and possession of paraphernalia. Our firm was able to negotiate a dismissal of all charges.
Defendant was stopped for speeding. Arrested for DUI, submitted to breath test and provided a urine sample. Motion to suppress urine test granted, case was dismissed.
The Defendant was seen driving on Congress Avenue and was clocked going 53 in a 40 mph zone. The defendant was seen by the officer collide with a curb and then weave in and out of his lane. When the officer stopped the defendant he smelled an odor of alcohol on his breath, his eyes were bloodshot and glassy and his speech was slow and slurred. He fumbled through his documents to get his license and handed the officer a registration to a motorcycle instead of the GMC truck he was driving. After being requested out of his vehicle, he was asked to perform roadside exercises. During the walk and turn exercise, the officer testified that the defendant could not maintain his balance in the starting position and paused “several” times (2 or 3) to regain his balance. He testified that the defendant never walked heel to toe and took 10 steps up on the first set and never counted out loud. The Firm pointed out that the video showed the defendant stand perfectly still for the entire starting position, took 9 steps up and 9 steps back as instructed, never paused for even a second to maintain his balance and was actually NEVER even instructed to count out loud. The officer testified that during the one leg stand, the defendant never even got to 30 and did not count out loud. The Firm pointed out that the defendant, on the video, counted all the way to thirty seconds with his foot up and was NEVER even instructed to count out loud. After these two exercises, the defendant was asked to sit back in the driver seat of his truck where the officer then shut off the audio portion of the roadsides. After 2 minutes, the defendant was arrested for Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol and taken to the Breath Alcohol Testing Facility. The officer requested a breath sample and the defendant refused. He told the officer that he had been drinking with his neighbor and he had a couple beers earlier in the evening. The Jury returned a verdict in 5 minutes of not guilty.
A Port St. Lucie client was charged with two criminal counts, count 1: Felony DUI and count 2: Refusing to Submit to the Breathalyzer. Florida Law makes it a crime for a person to refuse to submit to a breath test twice or more in their lifetime. The prosecutor had the simple task of proving our client refused the breath test twice, which the client’s driving record and evidence would clearly show. The Firm’s Treasure Coast Attorney first took the Felony DUI charge to trial and won with a NOT GUILTY verdict. The Firm’s Attorney declined a plea offer on count two and demanded a jury trial. The prosecutor refused to face the Firm’s attorney in trial again and dismissed count 2. Therefore, the client was Exoerated of all charges.
The defendant was arrested by the Port St. Lucie Police Department for his 3rd DUI, a felony charge. The defendant, a non-citizen of the United States, was facing 5 years in prison, a felony conviction and certain deportation back to Haiti. The Firm worked tirelessly to protect our client. According to police reports, the defendant was first noticed by police when he drove up behind a sergeant’s vehicle at a high rate of speed. The Sergeant pulled over and allowed the defendant to pass. The sergeant began to follow the defendant and observed the defendant “driving all over the road.” After pulling the defendant over, the sergeant smelled a strong odor of an alcoholic beverage and believed the defendant was “wasted.” The sergeant called for a DUI officer to investigate. The DUI officer noted that the defendant not only had a strong odor of an alcoholic beverage emanating from his breath, but also had slurred and mumbled speech, and watery eyes. The officer requested the defendant to perform field sobriety exercises and noted that they performed poorly and had an “extremely difficult time following instructions” on the first four exercises. The officer also noted that the defendant refused to complete the fifth exercise as well as refusing to submit to a breath test. The defendant's poorly performed exercises and difficulty in following instructions were captured on the officer’s dashboard camera. The Firm’s Treasure Coast Attorney immediately began formulating a defense. First, the attorney recognized the client’s primary language was Creole. However, the video revealed the officer never attempted to call for a Creole speaking officer, despite the client’s repeated statements that he did not understand the exercises. Furthermore, through investigation, the Firm’s attorney was able to discover the arresting officer was fluent in French, the language Creole is derived from. Yet the officer chose not to communicate in French. Additionally, the firm’s attorney discovered that prior to the defendant performing the exercises, he had informed the officer of a severe knee injury. The evidence revealed the officer clearly discounted this information in his assessment. Lastly, the firm’s attorney discovered audio conversations between the sergeant and officer that suggested they performed their investigation with bias and prejudice towards our client. The firm’s attorney brought these facts in front of a jury. The client was found Not Guilty of Felony DUI.
The Defendant was pulled over by officers from the Broward Sheriff’s Office for unlawfully violating a red light while traveling with a female passenger. The Defendant and passenger were we both required by officers to exit the vehicle. The officers then questioned the Defendant about what he had been doing with the female passenger, but did not see any criminal act of prostitution or other crime. The Defendant admitted to the officers that he had paid the female passenger for sex hours earlier. The officers issued a Notice of Appearance in lieu of arrest for Soliciting a Prostitute. The firm filed a Motion to Suppress on grounds that the Defendant’s statement was inadmissible because the officers, outside of that statement, had no evidence that the “body of the crime” had been committed. The State conceded to our Motion and all charges against the Defendant were Dropped.
The Defendant was seen by a Boca Raton Police Officer fail to come to a complete stop at a steady red light when making a right. As the officer followed him he observed the Defendant strike a curb while weaving out of the lane and then quickly correct the vehicle back to the right. As the Defendant approached a red light, he failed to stop at the stop bar when going through the light. The officer pulled the Defendant over and approached the driver’s door. The Defendant through a cigarette out the window as the officer approached and the officer asked the Defendant if he knew why he was pulled over. The Defendant said he knew he struck a curb. The officer then noticed that the Defendant’s breath had an odor of alcohol, his eyes were bloodshot and glassy. When asked for his license, insurance and registration, he fumbled around and couldn’t find the registration. He was asked to step out of the car to perform roadside exercises where he admitted he got off work around 11:30 p.m., went to a bar and drank four beers. When he got out of the car, he now had mints in his mouth when they weren’t there at the time of the stop. During the walk and turn, he stepped out of position on the instructional phase, stumbled on his 4th and 9th steps out and had to ask questions about how to turn around. He then stumbled on his fourth step back. During the one leg stand he put his foot down more than 4 times and used his arms to balance way off the sides of his body. He never touched the tip of his nose during the finger to nose exercise and swayed during the alphabet task. He was arrested for DUI and taken to the police station where he submitted to a breath test. He blew a .124 at 2:33 a.m. and again a .124 three minutes later. While on video and at the police station before he gave the breath sample he continually questioned the officers about whether he should take the test and then informed them that this would affect his job big time if he got a DUI. The Firm took the case to trial in front of a jury and brought out numerous inconsistencies with the arresting officer’s testimony. Additionally, the breath operator and maintenance technician were vigorously cross examined regarding whether the Defendant was above a .08 at the “time he was driving.” The jury returned a verdict of not guilty of DUI.
The Defendant was stopped for going 89 mph in a 50 mph zone. After the Deputy stopped the Defendant, he noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes and slurred speech. The Defendant admitted to drinking several beers. A DUI officer arrived to conduct a DUI investigation. The Defendant performed several field sobriety exercises unsatisfactorily and was arrested. The Defendant then provided breath samples of .129 and .125. Jury’s verdict: Not Guilty
A Stuart Police Officer initiated a traffic stop on the defendant. The officer arrested the defendant for failing to register a trailer that he was towing. After hiring The Ticket Clinic, the Firm’s Treasure Coast Attorney researched the facts and determined the apparatus towed by the defendant was actually considered a “tow dolly” and not a “trailer” as defined by Florida Law. Unlike a trailer, a tow dolly is not required to be registered in the State of Florida; therefore, the arrest was not valid. The Prosecution dropped all charges based on this research.
The defendant was on his way home in the early hours of the morning and was involved in a traffic crash that resulted in a passenger in the other vehicle being thrown from the bed of a pick-up truck. That passenger suffered serious injuries to his back and neck. Law enforcement was called to the accident scene and witnessed the defendant walking away from the scene of the accident in an effort “to call a tow truck”. Upon making contact with the defendant, law enforcement noticed only the odor of an alcoholic beverage. Thereafter, the Defendant was detained and was administered roadside sobriety exercises. The Defendant performed poorly during the roadside sobriety exercises and stated that they were “hard”. The Defendant was arrested for DUI and was requested to submit to a breath and urine test, which he refused. The Defendant was charged with felony charges arising out of this incident and based on our investigation into the request for breath and urine test and into the probable cause determination to do roadside exercises, charges all were dropped.
