The defendant was charged with DUI. The Officer’s stated that the defendant was speeding and slammed on his brakes in front of them. In addition they also alleged that he did poorly on the roadside sobriety exercises and gave a breath sample over the limit. The Firm attended pre-trial hearings regarding the officer’s testimony in this case and was able to get one of the officer’s to state that he did not specifically know what normal faculties were impaired with respect to the defendant on the night in question. The Firm set the case for trial and on the day of Trial the State dismissed all charges.
Miami-Dade County. Police respond to a traffic crash where they claim to have seen our client stumble out of his car and hold onto his door for balance. Upon approaching, police further claim to have detected the typical signs of impairment and that our client had urinated on himself. Police state that our client admitted to drinking that evening and that he failed his field sobriety exercises. When placed in the back of the police car, our client is said to have fallen asleep and to have drooled all over his shirt. After having been read his rights, our client is said to have admitted to having used various types of illegal drugs that day. Our client's urine sample came back positive for said drugs. Our attorneys were able to point out several weaknesses in the case and all the charges were dropped.
While on routine patrol, northbound on Howard Avenue at Cypress St, the Officer observed the Defendant’s vehicle traveling northbound. The vehicle did not have any tail lights on. A traffic stop was conducted. Upon meeting with the Defendant, the Officer immediately detected the distinct odor of an alcoholic beverage. The Officer confirmed that the odor was emanating from the Defendant’s breath. The Defendant’s eyes also appeared glassy and the Defendant had a physically unsteady appearance that was indicative of intoxication. The officer also noticed the headlights were in the off position. The Defendant was asked to perform field sobriety exercises and agreed. The Defendant’s eyes exhibited a lack of smooth pursuit, distinct and sustained jerking at maximum deviation and prior to 45 degrees during the HGN test. The “walk and turn” and one leg stand” exercises were also administered. The Defendant performed poorly and exhibited various indicators of impairment. The Defendant was then arrested for DUI and taken into custody. The Defendant refused to submit to a breath alcohol test. Result: The firm was able to convince the State to drop the DUI charge after pointing out multiple issues with the video and police report discrepancies.
Miami-Dade County. A vehicle was traveling east on NW 7th Street approaching NW 17th Avenue in the left turn lane when it struck our client who was crossing the street on foot with the aid of a walking stick. Our client, who suffered injuries to his face, was accused of causing minor damages to the vehicle. When the police arrived, because they saw a nearby crosswalk, decided to ticket our client for illegal use of a walking stick. Our attorneys expressed outrage at the issuing of such a ticket and pointed out errors in the ticket itself. As a result, and with the support of the Judge, the State Attorney reluctantly dismissed the charges.
Miami-Dade County. Our client was accused of pulling out of a private drive onto US-1 and striking a vehicle heading north and then fleeing from that accident scene. The driver of the second vehicle followed and wrote down the license plate number of the vehicle which hit his and provided it to the police. Our client was ticketed for improper lane change and for leaving the scene of an accident and accused of causing property damage in excess of $3000. Our attorneys successfully argued for the case to be dismissed on grounds that the State Attorney did not have sufficient evidence to proceed with the case.
Miami-Dade County. Our client was accused of swearing off the road and striking a mailbox and leaving the scene of that accident. In addition, our client was further accused of being involved in a separate crash rendering his vehicle immobile. As a result of the second crash, our client needed to be transported to the hospital to treat his injuries. Unfortunately for our client, there was evidence tying him to first accident and the police claimed to have witnessed the second crash. Our client was ticketed for leaving the scene of an accident and for several other infractions relating to the two incidents. Our attorneys were able to argue that the entire chain of events could not be properly established because there were no witnesses to the first accident (notwithstanding the "evidence" tying our client to it) and there were doubts as to whether our client was at fault for the second crash. As a result, the State Attorney was forced to dismiss the case for lack of evidence.
Miami-Dade County. Our client was accused of rear-ending another driver on SR 826 and leaving the scene of that accident. According to the other driver, our client sped away after the accident and the other driver followed long enough to write down the license plate number of the car that hit hers. That license plate number was given to the police and the police eventually tracked down and ticketed our client for leaving the scene of an accident. On the day of trial, the other driver stated that she was "pretty sure" the driver that hit her was in the court room. Our attorneys argued that the case still had significant weaknesses and should be dismissed. The State Attorney reluctantly agreed.
Miami-Dade County. Our client was accused of causing an accident while driving on a suspended license. According to eye witnesses, our client was driving at a high rate of speed and side swiped one car in an effort to avoid hitting another. Our clients car flipped several times before coming to a stop. When the police arrived they took statements from multiple witnesses (some of whom needed medical treatment) and ticketed our client for the accident and for driving while his license was suspended. On the day of trial, our attorneys argued that neither the the eye witnesses nor the police could properly identify our client as the man who was involved in the accident or the man driving on a suspended license because when everyone saw him his face was covered in blood and therefore obscured. The State Attorney was forced to drop the charges.
Police officers noticed our client speeding in his Gray Honda. The car was paced at 70PMH in a 45 MPH zone. Police noticed a smell of aocohol coming from the driver, glossy eyes, and slow/slurred speech. Roadside exercises were requested, but refused. Based on the observation noticed, a DUI arrest was made. A breath test was requested, but also refused. Ticket Clinic lawyers began defending the case, noting the lack of evidence. The State Attorney's office ultimately agreed to drop the DUI charge.
On May, 13, 2016, the Defendant was stopped in the area of Sunset Point Road and North Belcher Road after making an improper left turn from a through lane. As the officer spoke to the Defendant, he immediately detected the odor of an alcoholic beverage. Her eyes appeared bloodshot and watery. The Defendant's speech appeared mumbled and she admitted to consuming 2 bottles of beer before driving. The Defendant then submitted to field sobriety exercises which indicated impairment. The Defendant was arrested and provided a breath alcohol level of .089 and .092.
Results: the firm provided the prosecutors with information regarding the breath test results which indicated a possibility of the breath level being below .08 at the time of driving. The State then dropped the DUI charge.
Our client was charged with Reckless Driving. According to the officer, our client was driving 70 MPH in a 35 MPH zone and weaving in and out of traffic causing other drivers to slam on their breaks. The officer claimed he was chasing our client for approximately five blocks and that our client was "lucky" he wasn't charged with fleeing and eluding a law enforcement officer. After stopping our client, the officer stated he detected the odor of alcohol coming from our clients breath and conducted field sobriety exercises. The officer again stated our client was "lucky" he passed the field sobriety exercises and "only" ticketed him for reckless driving. At the end of the officer's interview, our attorneys asked the officer if he would be able to identify our client and the officer stated "of course". Upon entering back into the courtroom, our attorneys asked the officer to identify the person he ticketed. The officer was unable to do so and the State Attorney was forced to dismiss the charges.
The Client was stopped by law enforcement because the Officer had received notice from dispatch that she was driving impaired. Once stopped the Client informed the Officer that she was simply lost and was trying to use her phone and call her son to get directions. The video evidence demonstrated that not only might there be a problem with the stop of the vehicle, but the Client also did not appear to be impaired. Additionally, The Firm discovered a possible motion to suppress the roadside exercises based upon the fact that the Officer involved improperly coerced her to do them. After discussing these facts with the State Attorney's Office, along with other mitigating factors, the State agreed to dismiss the DUI charge.
