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.
The defendant was charged with driving on a suspended license. The defendant’s license was suspended for DUI and a drug conviction suspension. The State’s offer to resolve the case was jail time. The firm filed a motion to suppress the identity of the defendant as a result of a defective traffic stop. All charges were dismissed.
The Defendant was clocked going 75 mph in a 55 mph zone on Southern Boulevard. After being stopped, the Officer noticed he smelled alcohol on the Defendant’s breath, his eyes were bloodshot and glassy and his speech was slightly slurred. In addition, he was fumbling through his wallet looking for his documents. After he couldn’t find them, he told the officer he must have left his license with his credit card at the bar he was at and where he consumed some drinks. The officer asked him to step out of the car and he stumbled forward. He told the cop that “he was sorry” and that he “was not drunk.” The officer then asked the Defendant whether he would submit to roadside exercises to which the Defendant stated he would rather give a blood test. The officer stated that he could not do that now. The Defendant then refused the roadside exercises and was arrested. The Officer then searched the Defendant’s car where there was a blue cup in the center console which smelled like alcohol. The Defendant was taken to the Breath Facility where he was asked to submit to a sample of his breath. He refused to give a breath sample while asking for a blood test. The firm took the case to trial and the Defendant was found not guilty.
The Defendant was stopped for speeding. While the officer was attempting to stop the Defendant, he was driving up on other vehicles and then braking. After being stopped, the officer noticed bloodshot/glassy eyes and an odor of alcohol. When asked why he was speeding, he said because he is an “asshole”. The Defendant then admitted he was coming from a bar watching a sports game and probably drank more than he should have. He performed poorly on roadsides and was arrested. After being taken to the jail, he refused a breath test. The Firm negotiated with the State Attorney’s office and they agreed to dismiss the charges for Driving Under the Influence.
Officers from the Sunrise Police Department witnessed the Defendant smash his vehicle into an electronic gateway entrance for a residential development in the City of Sunrise. A traffic stop was conducted after the Defendant passed through the gate that he just crashed into. The officer asked the Defendant if he was ok after the crash and the defendant responded that “he was in Weston dropping off the girls.” Observations were made of the Defendant including, but not limited to: the odor of an alcoholic beverage; flushed face; bloodshot eyes; and unsteadiness on his feet. The Defendant was then asked to perform roadside sobriety exercises and asked if he had any ailments that would prevent him from doing the exercises. The Defendant responded “I have a mosquito bite that needs treatment”. The Defendant performed poorly on the roadside exercises to the extent that they had to be stopped because he was so severely impaired. The Defendant refused a breath test. During the investigation of the case, the firm discovered that the arresting officer had no independent recollection of the incident involving the Defendant. The firm then filed a motion to exclude him as a witness for trial, to which the state conceded. All DUI charges were dropped.
On 7/4/10 at approximately 3:23 am a Deputy was operating stationary radar on Hillsborough Ave and Countryway Blvd. He observed a 2009 Ford Mustang traveling at a high rate of speed. The radar produced a result of 65 mph in a 55 mph zone. The Deputy activated the lights and siren with the driver very slow to respond. The Depty had to pull along side the vehicle to get the vehicle to pull over. The vehicle then came to a very jerky, quick stop. Upon approaching the driver’s side window, the Depty noticed a very strong odor of an alcoholic beverage coming from the Defendant who was driving the vehicle. The Depty also noticed bloodshot, glassy eyes and an intoxicated appearance on the Defendant. The Defendant immediately told the Deputy she was speeding because her insulin pump was low. She also advised that she had consumed several vodka and cranberry drinks at The Roundup. The Defendant submitted to the field sobriety exercises but did not perform them to the satisfaction of the Deputy. The Defendant was placed under arrest and refused to provide a breath sample. Results: The case was set for trial and the State Attorney’s office dropped the DUI charge.
The defendant was involved in a single vehicle accident. According to the report, the defendant ran off the road and hit a sign. When the officer arrived on the scene, he observed several idicators of impairment. He observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech and a noticable sway. When he asked the defendant for his driver\'s license, he handed him a credit card. After noticing the indicators, the officer requested that the defendant perform field sobriety exercises. According to the officer, the defendant did poorly. He was arrested and taken to jail where he blew a .128. On the day of trial, the state dropped the DUI.
The defendant was discovered by police driving a vehicle after a clerk warned officers on the scene of a person drinking beer in the parking lot. Officers then made contact with the defendant and discovered that he had signs of impairment. The officers then detained him for over an hour while they waited for a DUI investigator to arrive at the scene. At which point roadside sobriety exercises were conducted and the defendant was taken to jail where he gave a breath sample in excess of the legal limit. Defense counsel filed a motion to suppress the DUI investigation based upon the fact that the defendant had been detained for too long on too little evidence. The defendant was cleared of all DUI charges and the case was dropped.
