The defendant was stopped for driving between 80-120 mph on I-95 and weaving from lane to lane, and unlawfully passing through a safety zone. The defendant admitted to consuming 4-5 beers, had the odor of an alcoholic beverage and bloodshot glassy eyes. The defendant performed poorly on roadside sobriety exercises and submitted to the breath test that registered .109/.106 g/210 L. The officer also found a six pack of beer with two empty beer cans in the defendant’s car. The Firm filed several Motions to Suppress Evidence in this case, each of which was granted. The State dropped all Dui charges.
On March 23, 2018 at approximately 2:30am Tampa Police Officers responded to a call of an impaired person sleeping in their car at the Thornton's gas station on Hillsborough Ave. The vehicle was running and the Defendant was asleep in the driver's seat. The officer tapped on the window in an attempt to wake the Defendant. The Defendant took several minutes to wake up. Upon waking the Defendant, the officer asked him to step out of the vehicle. The Defendant had an odor of alcoholic beverage on his breath and his speech was slurred. The Defendant was asked to perform field sobriety exercises which he complied. He was arrested after exhibiting multiple clues of impairment. The Defendant then refused to submit to a breath test.
Result: The firm provided information to the prosecutor that the initial interaction with the officer was in violation of the Defendant's constitutional rights. The State then dropped the DUI charge.
Law enforcement stopped the Client's vehicle as a result of the Client swerving within his own lane and hitting the solid white lane line. Once stopped the Officer observed signs of impairment by alcohol and had the Client submit to roadside exercises. The Client agreed but did poorly on said exercises. The Client was arrested for DUI and once at the jail submitted to a breath sample that was almost twice the legal limit. The Firm began looking into the case and found that the stop by law enforcement could be considered weak. In addition, the Client had no prior criminal history and was extremely cooperative with the Officers that stopped him. Based on these factors the State agreed to dismiss the DUI charge.
On August 23, 2018, a Tampa Police officer observed the Defendant driving a blue Mazda with only one tail light operating. The Defendant was also drifting in and out of his lane. The Defendant was traveling north on Howard Ave and ran a red light. The Defendant came to a stop before the ramp to I275, but stopped past the stop bar and was blocking the pedestrian crosswalk. Upon making contact with the Defendant, the Officer noticed a distinct odor of an alcoholic beverage. The Defendant admitted to 2 beers and agreed to complete field sobriety exercises. The Defendant exhibited multiple clues of impairment on the exercises. The Defendant was then arrested for DUI. The Defendant provided breath samples which registered .080 and .081.
Results: The case was set for trial and prior to the beginning of trial, the State dropped the DUI charge.
The Client was found passed out in his vehicle in the intersection by law enforcement. It took law enforcement some time to get the Client to wake up. Once the Client awakened, the Officer noticed indicators of impairment and stated that the Client admitted to drinking an entire bottle of vodka by himself. The Client was asked to submit to sobriety exercises, which he refused. He was then arrested and taken to jail where he also refused to provide a breath sample. The Firm thoroughly investigated the case and discovered that there was no roadside video and the Client looked good on the video while at the jail. The Firm informed the State that there was simply not enough evidence to prove impairment, other than the initial contact and statements, which couldn't be shown to the jury because there was no video. The State, after several months of back and forth conversations and hearings, finally agreed to dismiss the DUI.
Law enforcement stopped the Client's vehicle because it was swerving on the roadway. Once stopped they observed that the Client appeared to be under the influence of alcohol. Officers asked the Client to perform sobriety exercises, which the Client performed poorly on. The Client was arrested for DUI and taken to jail where she refused to provide a breath sample. The Firm looked into the legality of the stop, and discovered that the Officer's vehicle camera did capture the alleged driving pattern of the Client. However, the driving pattern didn't match what the Officer stated in his report. The Client's swerving was not as pronounced as the Officer had alleged. The Firm immediately filed a motion to suppress the stop of the Client's vehicle as unconstitutional. The State eventually agreed to dismiss the DUI as a result.
Our client pulled into a gas station parking lot and stopped in a space designated as handicap only. As the officer from Orlando Police Department pulled up behind the client, he noticed there was no handicap placard hanging from the rear view mirror and that our client's license plate did not have a handicap tag and that our client's tag was expired. The officer initiated a traffic stop and ordered our client out of his vehicle. Upon running our client's tag, the officer determined it was not assigned to our client's vehicle but to another car. The officer then issued our client a criminal violation for Attaching Tag Not Assigned and two companion civil traffic infractions for parking in a handicap space and expired tag. After hiring our firm the attorney worked in filing a motion to dismiss the criminal charge. After discussing the case with the State Attorney and Judge, the State dismissed the criminal charge against the client and the Judge dismissed the two traffic infractions. All charges were completely dismissed.
Our client holds a CDL and was driving a semi truck through Lake Mary when he was going over railroad tracks. The railroad track arms came down on the back of the client's truck and snapped off. A driver following the truck called 911 and reported our client for leaving the scene of an accident. A member of the local Police Department caught up with our client while he was making a delivery and issued him a criminal citation for leaving the scene of an accident carrying with it 6 points and likely a suspension of his commercial driver's license. The Office also issued him a civil citation for careless driving, carrying with it another potential for 4 points to be issued. After traveling to the scene with the client and taking videos of the malfunctioning railroad cross arms we showed the State the issues and they agreed to drop the criminal charge. The Judge however, refused to dismiss the citation for careless driving and it was set for a hearing. After the hearing, the careless driving charge was finally dismissed.
The Defendant was found to be the driver of a crashed vehicle. She was taken to the hospital where blood was drawn to determine what, if any substance she was under the influence from. Once the blood test came back it was determined that she was under the influence of several controlled substances, many of which were extremely potent intoxicants. The Firm investigated the case and determined that it appeared the blood draw was improper and addressed this issue with the State. The Firm also notified the State that the Client had voluntarily entered in-patient treatment for the substance abuse issues and was doing very well. With all of these factors to consider the State agreed to dismiss the DUI.
The Defendant was stopped for swerving all over the road and almost causing a collision. Once stopped the Officer believed he saw indicators of impairment and had the Client perform roadside sobriety exercises, which the Client performed poorly on according to the Officer. Once arrested for DUI the Client was transported to the jail and a breath test was requested. The Client allegedly complied and it resulted in a breath sample more than twice the legal limit. Because there was no video of any part of the investigation, the whole case rested upon law enforcement's good word. However, once the Firm began investigating the case it was discovered that the Officer, that was alleged to have given the breath sample, had no memory of the sample or of the Client. The Firm immediately filed a motion to suppress the breath sample. The State refused to concede the motion and drop the case. The Firm argued the motion and won the motion. The State requested a rehearing on the motion, but before the motion was re-argued the State dismissed the DUI.
A Port St. Lucie Police Officer pulled over the defendant while she was driving a moped. The officer claimed the reason for the traffic stop was that the defendant was in violation of Florida law for not wearing protective eye wear. During the traffic stop, the officer began to suspect that the defendant impaired by alcohol. The defendant submitted to the officer’s requests for her to perform field sobriety tasks. The officer claimed that she performed the tasks poorly and therefore charged her with DUI. Our legal team brought forth a legal motion after it was determined the officer did not make a lawful stop. The law requiring persons to wear eye protection applies only to “motorcycles.” However, the defendant was driving a moped that was powered by an engine less than what is defined as a “motorcycle”; therefore the law did not require her to wear protective eye wear. The DUI charge was dismissed.
The client was driving a car that had no motor vehicle registration and was caught by the police, and charged with a criminal offense. The Ticket Clinic Attorneys negotiated with the Office of the State Attorney resulting in all criminal charges being dismissed.
