The defendant was stopped for making several wide turns, weaving from lane to lane, and stopping in the middle of an intersection. Upon making contact with the defendant, the officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of an alcoholic beverage, red bloodshot and watery eyes, slurred speech and difficulty with his movements and handling vehicle documentation. The defendant was asked to perform roadside sobriety exercises and did so poorly. The defendant was arrested and submitted to a breath test and refused a urine test. The State dropped all charges after the firm notified the Office of the State Attorney that it would be unable to prove the substance by which the defendant was impaired.
The defendant was driving erratically and aggressively weaving in and out of traffic on busy congested Okeechobee Blvd at 7:00 at night. A civilian witness calls the police when he sees the driver drinking out of a wine bottle while driving the car and speeding and changing lanes aggressively. Citizen complainant stays on the phone and follows the defendant until a deputy arrives and starts following the defendant. The deputy testified that defendant’s vehicle was weaving back and forth in the lanes, driving onto the swale, almost hit a pedestrian walking his dog and then jerked the car forward when he came to a stop for the officer. The defendant had slurred speech, a strong odor of alcohol on his breath, red glassy and hazy eyes. The deputy testified that the defendant attempted to conceal a partially consumed bottle of wine and vodka in the center consol of the vehicle. He also testified that the defendant was trembling and shaking and could not keep his balance during any field sobriety exercises. The defendant could not walk heel to toe, did not keep his foot on the line, and swayed while walking. During the one leg stand, defendant put his foot down and swayed. During the finger to nose, the defendant swayed while standing, kept his finger on his nose instead of bringing it back down as instructed and missed the tip of his nose on numerous occasions. The deputy arrested defendant for DUI and during the ride over to the Breath Alcohol testing facility defendant stated “I’m going to refuse that test, you are never going to prove that I was drunk.” Defendant refused the breath test at the BAT facility. Verdict: Not Guilty.
The defendant was seen by an officer speeding 65 mph in a 35 mph zone and weaving in a construction zone. The officer initiated a traffic stop and the defendant pulled over almost striking a construction barricade. The defendant had an odor of an alcoholic beverage that was described as obnoxious and putrid by officers; had bloodshot watery eyes; slurred speech and had a dazed and confused look, not to mention a mismanaged appearance. The defendant was asked to perform roadside sobriety exercises, but refused them and then later refused a breath test and loudly belched at the breath testing facility in front of law enforcement personnell. The defendant was found not guilty at trial after only about 5 minutes of jury deliberations.
The defendant was stopped within a BSO DUI checkpoint on Oakland Park Boulevard. Upon making contact with the defendant, the BSO deputy noticed the defendant to have a strong odor of an alcoholic beverage, bloodshot watery eyes, extremely slurred speech, slow and lethargic movements, and a dazed look. The defendant was asked to move his car to an area to perform roadside exercises and almost hit a cone and another vehicle. The defendant was asked to perform roadside sobriety exercises and did so poorly. The defendant submitted to a breath test on site and registered .191/.194 on the intoxylizer, well over twice the legal limit. The firm filed a motion to suppress the stop at the check point and the detention of the defendant by the arresting officer. The judge granted the motion to suppress and all evidence was excluded from trial. The State’s appeal of the judge’s ruling was dismissed. The State dropped all charges.
The defendant was stopped by police when they witnessed him driving over pavement lines, swerving, and failing to maintain his lane of travel. Police noted that defendant\'s speech was slurred, his response was slow, his eyes were bloodshot, and they detected a strong odor of an alcoholic beverage. The defendant performed poorly on roadside sobriety tasks and was arrested for DUI. The defendant then refused to provide a sample of his breath to police. DUI charge dropped by the State 4-29-08.
The defendant was stopped by a Broward Sheriff’s Office Deputy for speeding on Oakland Park Boulevard. Upon making contact with the defendant, the deputy noticed the odor of an alcoholic beverage, bloodshot watery eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant also used the steering wheel for balance when exiting her vehicle. The defendant was asked to perform roadside sobriety exercises at the scene of the stop and did so poorly. The defendant was arrested and taken to the Breath Alcohol Testing Facility and again performed physical performance exercises poorly to the extent that she was compelled to hold the wall for balance. She also submitted to a breath test that resulted in a .137/.141 reading on the intoxylizer. The defendant was found not guilty by a jury after only 4 minutes of deliberations.
The police witnessed the defendant and another person acting extremely intoxicated as they were leaving a nightclub and getting into their vehicle. The police then observed the same vehicle driving and conducted a traffic stop. The police noticed defendant to have a very strong odor of an alcoholic beverage emanating from him as he spoke, and that he had bloodshot droopy eyes. The police asked the defendant to sit on the front bumper of his patrol car due to his extreme intoxication. The officer asked the defendant how much he had to drink and he said “a lot”. The defendant was arrested for DUI and refused a breathalyzer test. DUI charge dropped by the State.
The Defendant was pulled over for failing to maintain her lane. The stopping Deputy noticed that the defendant exhibited an odor of an alcoholic beverage and other indicia of alcohol impairment. The defendant performed poorly on roadside exercises and submitted to both a breath and urine test. The State Dropped all charges.
The police made contact with the defendant when they noticed him to be slumped over the wheel of his vehicle. The police asked him where he was coming from and he said Peru. The police noticed an obvious odor of an unknown alcoholic beverage coming from his breath as he spoke, that his eyes were bloodshot and glassy and that he was crying. The defendant performed poorly on roadside exercises and was arrested for DUI. The defendant provided two samples of his breath of .129 and .121 both over the legal limit of .08. The defendant found not guilty of DUI after a jury trial.
The defendant was seen by two Florida Highway Patrol Officers traveling at 99 mph in a 65 mph posted speed zone on the Florida Turnpike and made several erratic lane changes and was tailgating other vehicles and causing them to take evasive action. The troopers conducted a traffic stop on the shoulder of the turnpike. The defendant was asked to exit his vehicle and was so unsteady that he almost fell into a lane of travel on the turnpike. The defendant had an odor of an alcoholic beverage on his breath; had red blood shot eyes; had difficulty handling and identifying his vehicle documentation and was very unsteady. The defendant was asked to perform roadside sobriety exercises and performed poorly as an impaired or intoxicated person would. The defendant submitted to a breath test and registered a .094/.095 on the intoxylizer. The State dropped all DUI charges.
The defendant was stopped for speeding. She completed the roadside exercises and refused the breath test. DUI charge dropped
The defendant’s car was stopped for continuously weaving within it’s lane of travel and for making a wide turn. After stopping the vehicle, the officer learned that the tag was registered to a different vehicle and that the defendant was unable to show proof of insurance. Signs of impairment were noticed and roadside exercises were performed on video. After the officer concluded that the roadsides were performed poorly, the defendant was arrested. At the police station a breath test was attempted. The officer felt as though the defendant was “playing games” at the breath machine, not blowing properly. 2 breath samples were obtained; .134, .136, however they were considered “volume not met”. The breath test results were not admitted into evidence, and the defendant was found not guilty of the DUI after trial.
