Police were called out to a residence after our client allegedly attempted to enter a home. When the police arrived, they found him passed out inside of his car. The officers discovered that he did not live at the address and the homeowner did not know who he was. The officers conducted a DUI investigation and our client requested that they simply take him to jail because he was too intoxicated. The lawyers at the firm were able to convince the prosecutors that they would not be able to prove that our client was actually driving or in control of the vehicle. At the day of trial, the prosecuting attorney dropped all DUI related charges.
Our client was arrested for DUI after running a red light. The client agreed to provide a breath sample and blew .152, almost double the legal limit. The lawyers at the firm successfully argued to transfer the client's case to Veteran's Court. Because the client served in the armed forces and successfully completed the Veteran's Court Treatment Program, all of his charges were dismissed.
The defendant was stopped for failing to use his turn signal as he made a right onto Oakland Park Boulevard. The defendant affected no other traffic when he turned. Thereafter, the officer discovered the defendant’s driver’s license was revoked as a habitual traffic offender and arrested the defendant on Felony charges. The Firm filed a Motion to Suppress the Unlawful Stop of the defendant’s vehicle that was granted. All charges were dropped by the State.
Defendant was stopped for driving recklessly and causing other drivers to take evasive action. After being arrested for Felony DUI, the defendant took the breath test and blew .184 & .178 and performed exercises on video. DUI charge dropped.
Our client had a lengthy criminal record which included prison time and was looking at another long sentence if convicted. Our client was the passenger in a vehicle which was exiting a congested commercial parking lot when his vehicle was struck by another vehicle. The mannerisms of the other vehicle's driver indicated that they were possibly impaired. The vehicle then attempted to speed off while our client's vehicle pursued. Our client's vehicle then cut the other vehicle off and our client, as well as the driver of the other vehicle exited their cars. Our client grabbed the keys from the other driver in an attempt to prevent him from fleeing. In the process, a fight ensued which resulted in the driver of the other vehicle being treated for facial fractures and lacerations. While receiving medical treatment, the alleged victim provided a blood test which indicated that he was twice above the legal limit for impairment. Our client was charged with felony battery. We deposed the attending medical personnel as well as the victim and a witness. We were able to gather contradicting statements from the witness and the alleged victim indicated his reluctance to participate in the prosecution of our client. After indicating the difficulties of the case to the State, they agreed to dismiss the case.
The client was driving her vehicle on Alico road and, while adjusting the radio, she struck a vehicle which was stopped at a red light. The officer issued the client a citation for reckless driving. In the report, the officer indicated that the client was driving the speed limit and that the cause of the accident was due to her being distracted by the radio. We filed a motion to dismiss alleging that the State did not have the facts necessary to convict under the reckless driving statute.
In our argument we pointed out that the crime of Reckless Driving is defined under Section 316.192, Florida Statutes. Under the statute, Reckless Driving consists of two factual elements:
The defendant drove a motor vehicle, and
The defendant did so with a willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property.
Determining whether behavior is reckless is a factual inquiry. In this case, all that we have is a rear end collision with no tire marks and a confession of playing with the radio which is most likely excluded from trial under the accident report privilege.
As indicated in the statute, neither carelessness nor ordinary negligence in the operation of a vehicle are sufficient to support a conviction for reckless driving. See State v. Lebron, 954 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007); D.E. v. State, 904 So. 2d 558 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005). The defendant’s actions must be knowing and purposeful, or carried out with a conscious and intentional indifference to consequences and while knowing that harm was likely to be done to persons or property. W.E.B. v. State, 553 So.2d 323, 325-26 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). We presented the argument that the actions of the client were merely negligent and did not constitute a blatant disregard for the safety of others and therefore were not sufficient to satisfy a conviction. The State agreed and dismissed the case on 1/23 before the motion was heard.
Client was arrested for the first time ever while driving on a suspended license. The Ticket Clinic Attorneys were able to negotiate with the Office of the State Attorney, resulting in no criminal conviction, keeping the client’s record clean, all without the client ever having to appear in court.
A Manatee County Sheriff Deputy noticed a vehicle drifting within its lane. The vehicle would touch the white has mark on the right and the solid white line on the left. The Deputy then noticed the driver was not wearing his seat belt. A traffic stop was conducted. The Deputy then made contact with the Defendant who had droopy eye lids, a flushed face and bloodshot, glassy eyes. The Defendant spoke with a slur and appeared off balance when he exited his vehicle. The Deputy requested the Defendant to perform field sobriety exercises, which he agreed. The Defendant exhibited multiple clues of impairment. The Deputy then read the Defendant his Miranda warnings, which the Defendant waived. The Defendant admitted to drinking throughout the day and smoking two bowls of marijuana. The Defendant was then arrested for DUI. A search of his vehicle resulted in the Deputy finding a pipe with marijuana residue. The Defendant admitted this was the pipe he used to smoke earlier in the day. The Defendant provided 2 breath samples of .000. He also provided a urine sample which was positive for marijuana.
Result: Based on discussions with the firm regarding the evidence in the case, the State dropped the DUI charge.
Client was arrested for the first time ever while driving on a suspended license. The Ticket Clinic Attorneys were able to negotiate with the Office of the State Attorney, resulting in no criminal conviction, keeping the client’s record clean, all without the client ever having to appear in court.
On July 23, 2017, the Defendant was involved in a crash. The Defendant violated the right of way of another vehicle while pulling away from a stop sign. After the initial traffic crash investigator noticed a strong odor of alcohol on the Defendant's breath and other indicators of impairment, a DUI investigator was called to the scene. The DUI officer requested the Defendant to perform field sobriety exercise, which he refused. The Officer then placed the Defendant under arrest for DUI involving property damage. The Defendant refused to provided a breath sample.
Result: the firm filed a motion for discharge and prior to the motion being heard, the State dropped the DUI charge.
The Defendant was stopped after he was observed traveling westbound on Kennedy Blvd and running the red light at Howard Ave. The Defendant also drifted in and out of his lane prior to coming to a stop. Upon making contact with the Defendant, the Officer noticed a blank/dazed stare and watery/bloodshot eyes. The Defendant also had an odor of an alcoholic beverage on his breath and was unsteady on his feet when he exited the vehicle. The Defendant performed poorly on the field sobriety exercises and was arrested for DUI. The Defendant provided two breath samples of .087 and .092.
Result: Based on discussions with the firm, the State dropped the DUI charge.
Defendant was stopped for speeding. The Officer claims to smell the odor of alcohol as he was approaching the vehicle. The Defendant refused all field sobriety and breath exercises. A Jury found the Defendant not guilty
