Our client was driving a rental truck commonly used for moving in the parking lot of a busy retail store. Hours after leaving the store, a member of the Florida Highway Patrol arrived at his residence to investigate an allegation that he hit a vehicle in the parking lot and left without exchanging information. The Trooper cited him with a criminal offense and a careless driving ticket. Our client hired us and before we got to court, we were able to request and gain access to the video camera footage from the retail store showing the alleged accident. The high quality video surveillance showed our client's entire driving pattern in the parking lot and at no point could an actual "accident" or "crash" be viewed. We argued first that our client never actually hit any vehicle and in the alternative that if he did, he did not know he hit any vehicle and therefore could not be charged with leaving the scene of an accident he never knew he was in. After reviewing the video, the State Attorney agreed and dismissed the criminal charge against our client and the Court dismissed the careless driving charge.
Our client was on his way home from a birthday party when he pulled over on the 417 in Seminole County. A member of the Seminole County Sheriff's Office found our client sleeping at the wheel of his car with the car in drive on the shoulder of the road. No complaints were made by any citizens in regards to his driving. Upon awaking, our client complied with all of the Deputy's commands. Our client politely refused to participate in any field sobriety tests and also declined to submit to a breath sample. The Deputy arrested our client based on the odor of alcohol, him sleeping behind the wheel, his admission to drinking alcohol, and other visual observations. We argued that without performing any field sobriety tests, no breath sample, and no poor driving, there was insufficient evidence to prove that our client was in fact Driving Under the Influence. The State Attorney agreed and dropped the DUI charge.
The Client was stopped for driving 61mph in a 35mph zone. Once stopped the Officer observed that the Client was collecting her belongings and exiting her vehicle. The Officer heard her say that she had drank too much. The Officer had her complete field sobriety exercises and her performance on the same was poor. Once arrested the Client gave a breath sample that was almost twice the legal limit. The Firm discussed the Client's lack of a prior conviction record and her cooperation with the State's investigation with the Assistant State Attorney assigned to the case. After the meeting the State agreed to dismiss the DUI charge.
The Client was stopped for speeding and after the stop the Officer noticed that the Client smelled like alcohol, had slurred speech and according to the Officer had trouble balancing. The Officer requested that the Client perform Field Sobriety Exercises,which the Client declined to do. The Officer then arrested the Client for DUI and transported him to the Breath Alcohol Testing facility and requested a breath sample of the Client. The Client refused to give a breath sample. The Firm obtained the evidence in the case, including the videos, and determined that the Officer in the case did not accurately describe the Client's condition. In the video the Client did not have trouble balancing or have slurred speech as alleged by the Officer in his report. After discussions with the Assistant State Attorney the DUI charge was dismissed.
The Client was charged with DUI accident involving injury after he crashed his motorcycle with his wife on the back. The Client was seriously injured in the crash and had to be transported to the hospital immediately. Once at the hospital law enforcement did a blood draw without the Client's consent. The blood draw revealed that the Client had a blood alcohol level that was over the legal limit. The Firm argued that new and recent caselaw on the national level effected the validity of the blood draw. The State agreed and dismissed the DUI charge against the Client.
The Deputy observed our client swerving in and out of his lane on more than three occassions, nearly striking other vehicles. The Deputy approached our client and as a result of the interaction noted that our client had red, glassy eyes and difficulty with his fine motor skills. This caused the Deputy to intiate FSE's. Our client admitted to drinking three beers and did not perform well on the FSE's. As a result, our client was arrested and charged with DUI.
In this case, the argument was that the Deputy lacked the reasonable suspicion necessary to initiate the FSE's. Also, the credibility of the Deputy and the validity of the interaction were all questioned, due to the refusal of the Deputy to call for a Spanish speaking officer when one was repeatedly requested by our Spanish speaking client.
After his initial stop, the Deputy indicates in his initial observation that Mrj has glassy bloodshot eyes and had difficulty retrieving requested items. This would fall short of comprising the reasonable suspicion necessary to initiate FSE's (important that there is no mention of the smell of alcohol, nor slurred speech, etc) In addition, our client indicated that he repeatedly requested a Spanish translator and was not provided one. Our client speaks very broken English and required a translator during my meeting with him.
As a result of the above-mentioned actions, the DUI was reduced to a reckless.
After a minor traffic accident, our 73 year-old Client was arrested and charged with his 2nd DUI. As part of the arrest, Client blew .144. Investigation by defense counsel revealed that Client had been clean & sober for many years before his most recent arrest. Investigation also revealed that Defendant had been diagnosed with cancer and his wife had been placed in hospice shortly before his arrest, and that is what led to his relapse with alcohol. State attorney agreed to drop DUI charges in humanitarian grounds.
Client was initially stopped and removed from his car at gunpoint on suspicion of fleeing & eluding after a brief pursuit by police led to the Client running a stop sign at a high rate of speed, almost hitting a marked police car, and then crashing into a curb (damaging his wheel and flattening his tire). Further investigation led to the Client's arrest for DUI, and he provided breath samples of .149/.142. Review of police video revealed errors in the investigating officers' administration of field sobriety exercises, and demonstrated extreme cooperation on the part of the Client. Investigation by defense counsel revealed that the Client, who worked at a car dealership, would lose his job if he were convicted of DUI. State attorney was convinced to drop all DUI charges based on the cumulative effect of the investigative errors, the Clients cooperation with investigating officers, and mitigation regarding the impact of a DUI conviction on the Client's employment status and ability to provide for his family.
The Client was on probation for felony drug possession when he was arrested for DUI. The DUI charge caused him to be violated on his felony probation and he was facing a maximum of five years in Florida State Prison. The firm investigated the reason for the violation, the DUI charge, and discovered that the client did not appear impaired at all. The firm discussed this issue with the State Attorney's office and they agreed to dismiss the DUI and reinstate the client on probation with no jail time and allow the Client remain free of a felony conviction on his record.
Our client was charged as a Habitual Traffic Offender by the Florida Department of Motor Vehicles and as a result had her license revoked for a period of 5 years. We found that our client had twice previously been cited for Driving While License Suspended Without Knowledge, a civil traffic citation that does not require a court appearance and just be paid. Our client paid each of these citations, was adjudicated guilty, had points assessed, and was ordered to pay a fine. After paying these fines, the Habitual Traffic Offender designation took effect. We filed motions to mitigate her sentences, removing the adjudication of guilt and points from her license in two separate counties where these tickets were received. Both motions were granted by the court, the Habitual Traffic Offender Designation was removed and our client was able to receive her driver's license back within weeks of losing it instead of 5 years later.
Our client was stopped in Downtown Orlando shortly after 2am for a traffic infraction. The arresting officer noticed our client smelled of alcohol, had slurred speech, and bloodshot watery eyes. The officer conducted a DUI investigation and arrested our client for DUI with a breath alcohol level about a .15. Our client is in the medical field and a conviction for DUI could cost her various licenses she has that she needs in order to stay employed at her hospital. We were able to get her into a program for first time offenders whereby upon completion the State would dismiss the charges against her. After successfully completing the program the State did dismiss the charges and our client did not lose any of her medical licenses or privileges.
Our client was stopped by a member of the Orlando Police Department at 1:40am for speeding. Our client was not cited for speeding but charged with criminally driving while license suspended with knowledge. We began working on the case by challenging the officer's legal basis to stop our client. Without a written citation or warning for a speeding violation and only a mention of a speeding violation in the ticket for driving while license suspended, the officer was later unable to recall any important details about the events leading up to the traffic stop. We spoke with the prosecutor handling the case and before filing a motion to suppress the evidence based on an illegal stop, the State dismissed the case against our client.
