Facts: Officers reported to the scene of an alleged altercation between a male and female. One of the officers made contact with the female who he saw was driving a blue Mazda 4 door vehicle. She was backing the vehicle out of a parking space as the officers arrived on scene. The Defendant opened the door immediately and started screaming and cursing at the officer before he even introduced himself or explain why they were there. The Defendant stated she was looking for a phone battery and wanted him to “leave her the f@** alone.” The officer noticed the defendant had red/bloodshot eyes, slightly slurred speech and an odor of alcohol coming from her breath. The Defendant’s boyfriend stated that the Defendant was driving in an out of control manner going more than twice the speed limit, swerving in and out of traffic and casing him to fear for his safety. He was finally able to convince her to pull over and let him drive but she then threatened to leap out of the car if he kept driving. They pulled over again and she got back into the driver seat where she was seen by officers attempting to leave. The Defendant’s boyfriend told the officers that the Defendant consumed several glasses of wine prior to driving and that she had some hard liquor. He gave a sworn statement to that effect. The Defendant was asked to perform roadsides which she hesitantly agreed to do. She answered every questioned posed by the officer by saying “I have a medical condition for that.” After performing poorly on the exercises, the Defendant was taken back to the jail where she gave a breath sample of .120 and .116. The Firm filed a motion to suppress arguing that the Defendant was misadvised when she was requested to submit to the breath test and therefore coerced into giving her breath samples. The State of Florida agreed to the motion and agreed to exclude the breath. Subsequently, because of the loss of that evidence, the State agreed to drop the charge for Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol.
The defendant had Alprazolam in her pocket when she had been stopped by police. She was not legally prescribed the medication and was looking at up to 5 years in prison. The firm was able to convince the state to allow her into a program to address her drug abuse issues. After completion of the program, the firm was able to get the charge dismissed.
After her boyfriend was arrested for driving her car on a suspended license our client was called to the scene to pick up her car. Before releasing her car to her, law enforcement officers asked our client several questions. As our client was about to leave in her car, law enforcement accused her of allowing an unauthorized person to drive her car. According to law enforcement our client knew that her boyfriend's driver's license was suspended and allowed him to drive anyway. Our client was ordered to appear in court on this criminal offense. Our client immediately contacted our office to begin working on her case. We reviewed all of the State's evidence and Law Enforcement's reports. Together with our client our office then prepared a defense strategy. Our plan was to block key pieces of evidence from being introduced based on law enforcement's flawed Miranda warnings. After reviewing the details of the case with the State our office began preparing a motion to suppress. However, soon after our discussions with the State detailing these flaws the State dismissed the charge.
Our client was arrested and charged with Racing on a Highway after an Officer with the Apopka Police Department used a Laser speed measuring device to clock him doing 101 mph in a 45 mph zone. The Officer's report did not mention any other vehicles involved in the race or that any other person was suspected of or arrested for competing in this "race" against our client. Furthermore, there was no indication that our client's driving pattern could be considered as reckless driving. After presenting our arguments in court to the Judge, the State agreed to dismiss the case against our client.
Our client was allegedly at fault in a hit and run accident. The other vehicle involved took a picture of our client's license plate as he left the scene and called police. A Trooper from the Florida Highway Patrol responded and tracked our client back to his home using the plate provided by the other driver. Our client's vehicle was parked in the driveway and had noticeable damage to it consistent with the accident the witness described.The Trooper subsequently charged our client with a criminal offense for Leaving the Scene of an Accident. The State's initial offer to our client was an adjudication of guilt, and a $400 fine which would have led to 6 points being added to our client's license. We began working on the case trying to exclude any evidence we believed was improperly obtained and arguing that a photo of a license plate could not prove who the actual driver of the vehicle was. We also brought in evidence that insurance had already repaired the damage to the other car completely and that driver was not out of pocket any money. Based on all of these reasons, the State dropped the criminal charge against our client.
Our client is under the age of 18, having only had a driver's license for about a year. She was involved in a car accident and after briefly speaking with the driver of the other vehicle, she panicked at hearing the police were on their way and left the scene. After police tracked her down to her home, she was given a criminal violation for Leaving the Scene of an Accident without Giving Information. Our client's insurance company settled the claim with the driver of the other vehicle. Additionally our client agreed to take a 4 hour basic driver's improvement class and in exchange, the State agreed to drop the criminal charge.
Our client was accused of cutting off another driver, causing an accident and then leaving the scene of that accident. On the day of trial the Assistant State Attorney indicated that all their witnesses were present and stated they were ready to go forward with the trial. Our client felt awful about the situation and asked our attorneys to quickly resolve the case. Our attorneys, however, immediately began interviewing the state witnesses and it became clear that none of them were able to identify our client. As it turns out, the Assistant State Attorney had subpoenaed the wrong witnesses. Upon realizing their mistake they requested a continuance and the Judge denied their request. The State was forced to dismiss the charges against our client.
Police respond to a single car accident with serious injuries and speak with our client who allegedly described the accident. During this exchange, the police claim to have detected the odor of alcohol on our clients breath. The police completed their accident investigation and immediately began a DUI investigation. Our client refused to perform the field sobriety exercises and refused to give a breath sample. Our client was arrested and charged with felony DUI due to the serious injuries sustained by his passengers who were taken to the hospital. Within a month of the accident our attorneys managed to get the felony case dismissed and the case was refiled as a misdemeanor DUI. Our attorneys immediately set the misdemeanor DUI for trial and that case was also dismissed for insufficient evidence.
Our client is alleged to have been driving over 50MPH in Tamiami Park while people were walking and conducting other outdoor activities. As the police officer began to follow our client, it was alleged that he increased his speed and began tailgating the car in front of him. Our client is then alleged to have changed lanes aggressively, without a turn signal and somehow wound up on the wrong side of the road. The police further stated that this action caused other cars to drive off the road in an effort to avoid a head on collision. Our attorneys immediately set the case for trial and during our interview of the police officer were able to show a number of inconsistencies in his memory, including a poor recollection of what our client looked like. As a result, the assistant state attorney was forced to dismiss the case.
Our client was arrested for allegations of stealing from a big box store. According to law enforcement our client failed to pay for a few items when she used the self checkout lane. Store employees made contact with our client just as she was leaving the store and contacted police. Upon arriving at the store law enforcement spoke with the store employees and reviewed the video surveillance. Then law enforcement attempted to ask our client questions about the unpaid items. Eventually law enforcement arrested our client even though she had paid for most of the items in her possession. After bonding out of jail our client contacted our office to begin working on her case. We thoroughly reviewed all of the State's evidence, Law Enforcement's reports, and the witness statements. Together with our client our office then prepared a defense strategy. Finally, we reviewed each detail of the case with the State pointing out several flaws between the reports and witness statements. Soon after the State dismissed the charge.
The police responded to an accident scene on I-95 involving a flipped over tractor trailer and three other vehicles. The driver of the tractor trailer was taken to the hospital as a result of the accident and the other drivers complained of minor injuries. Our client was charged with driving without a valid drivers license and being the cause of the accident. Our attorneys interviewed all 5 of the state witnesses (which included a police officer and the 4 other drivers) who gave varying accounts of what happened. As a result, our attorneys were able to show that no one could actually prove our client was the cause of the accident much less that he was driving without a valid license. Notwithstanding that all 4 of the accident "victims" were demanding financial compensation for their medical bills, our attorneys were able to convince the state attorney to dismiss the charges.
Link to the news article regarding this case:
http://wsvn.com/news/tractor-trailer-flips-spilling-plywood-onto-i-95/
Sheriff's Deputies were called to the scene of a car facing westbound in the eastbound lane with two flat tires. When deputies approached the car our client was asleep, when asked if everything was okay our client told them that he blew out a tire and was waiting for AAA for roadside assistance. The deputies noticed the smell of alcohol on our client's breath, that he had bloodshot glassy eyes, and slurred speech. The deputies asked our client to perform field sobriety exercises which he voluntarily did. Our client allegedly performed badly on the exercises, and was arrested for DUI. There was no video taken by the deputies in this case to confirm or deny these allegations.
Our client admitted to the officers that he had two drinks with dinner, but asserted that he performed badly on field sobriety exercises because of the effects of his Type II Diabetes. Our client was asked to take a breathalyzer which he voluntarily did, and blew twice the legal limit at .161.
Our firm prepared for trial. We prepared to challenge the reliability of Breathalyzers on subjects with Type II Diabetes, and assert that any signs of impairment indicated were from the effects of Type II Diabetes.
