The Defendant was involved in a crash. When officers made contact with him, he was unable to indicate which direction he had been traveling in. He did not know where he was. The officer smelled alcohol on him, he had slurred speech, and he had trouble walking in a straight line. The Defendant told the officer that he had consumed an entire bottle of wine before driving. The officer asked him to do roadside exercises, but the Defendant refused. The officer placed him under arrest. The Defendant provided a breath sample of .185 and .188, over twice the legal limit. The attorney for the firm prepared the case for trial and the State dropped all DUI related charges.
According to the police, the Defendant was speeding and weaving in and out of his lane. Upon making contact with the Defendant, the officer noticed various signs of impairment, including odor of alcohol on his breath, bloodshot eyes and slurred speech. The Defendant admitted to having 3 or 4 drinks prior to driving. As he exited the vehicle, the Defendant almost fell over and had to use the car to maintain balance. The officer asked the Defendant to submit to 3 roadside exercises, and he agreed. The Defendant performed poorly on all 3 exercises. The officer placed the Defendant under arrest for DUI and requested a breath sample. The Defendant refused. The attorney investigated the case and prepared for trial. The State dropped all DUI related charges.
Our client was radared going 85 in a 45 mph zone and unable to maintain a single lane. According to the Police Report the officer smelled the odor of alcohol on our clients breath, he had bloodshot glassy eyes, and slurred speech. Also according to the police report, when the officer asked our client to get out of the vehicle so that he could serve the traffic tickets on him , the client stumbled upon exiting and swayed while standing. However the video and audio from the dash cam tell a different story. Our client performed the field sobriety exercises with only some minor mistakes, all easily explained by a knee injury our client preemptively told the officer would cause him problems. The video and audio on the dash cam showed our client to speak with no slur, and standing with no sway. Our firm reviewed all the States evidence and prepared for trial. After pointing out the serious inconsistencies with the officer's Police report and our clients actual performance on the video, and providing significant mitigation for our client the State dismissed the DUI charge the day of trial.
The Client was stopped for a non-working right brake light. As a result it was discovered that the Client's license was suspended for DUI. The State was offering 30 days in jail. The Firm discovered that the traffic stop of the Clients vehicle was unlawful and filed a motion stating the same. After consideration the State agreed to dismiss all charges.
According to police, the Defendant and a female passenger were passed out in a vehicle stopped in the right lane of the Turnpike. Upon making contact with him, the officer noticed the odor of alcohol on his breath. His eyes were bloodshot, and he was wearing a VIP wrist band from a nightclub. The officer asked if he would perform roadside exercises and he agreed. The Defendant performed poorly on all exercises. He was arrested for DUI and gave a breath sample of .095 and .103. The attorney for the firm prepared the case for trial and the State dropped the DUI charge against the Defendant.
According to police, they Fugitive Task Force was sent to pick up a fugitive who was on the run from an Attempted Murder charge. They arrived at the home of the Defendant, who was believed to be the mother of the fugitive’s girlfriend. There had been reports that the fugitive was hiding out at her home. The officers approached the Defendant’s home early in the morning. They had their guns drawn. The Defendant was outside smoking a cigarette. When she saw the police, she told them to leave unless they had a warrant. The officer claimed that the Defendant became belligerent, swung the door at him, and waved her cigarette in his face. The attorney for the firm investigated the case, and prepared for trial. On the day of trial, the State dropped all charges against the Defendant.
Our client was pulled over an alleged safety violation while driving a large truck pulling a heavy trailer. Our client possessed a commercial driver’s license (CDL) from the state of Georgia. The Florida Highway Patrolman believed the gross weight of the truck and trailer required a CDL class that he believed our client did not possess. The Trooper issued our client a criminal citation for driving outside of his classification. It was our belief and argument that the Trooper should never have written our client for this violation. Immediately upon receiving the case, our firm worked on determining the differences between our client’s Georgia CDL and the Florida requirement the Trooper charged him for not possessing. This information, coupled with information provided by our client’s supervisor regarding the actual combined gross weight of the truck and trailer led us to getting all criminal charges against our client dismissed.
Our client was stopped for allegedly running a red light on a busy road at 12:20am. Upon further investigation, the officer believe our client may be driving under the influence of alcohol. The officer observed the odor of alcohol, bloodshot and watery eyes, and delayed movements. After performing poorly on the field sobriety tests, the officer arrested our client. At the jail, our client refused to supply the officer with a sample of her breath. We were able to place our client in a program for first time offenders. Our client successfully completed this program and the State dismissed all criminal charges against her, allowing her to proceed with a clean record.
After pulling over our client for speeding, an officer certified as a Drug Recognition Expert, noticed our client had blood shot eyes and dilated pupils that did not react to light. The officer suspected our client was impaired by marijuana. The officer claimed our client performed poorly on roadside exercises and found 2.5 grams of marijuana in the client’s car. Our client admitted to smoking marijuana a few hours earlier. A urine test revealed THC, the compound found in marijuana, was in the urine of our client. The officer charged our client with DUI and Possession of Marijuana. Our client was adamant that he needed his driver license to keep his job; both charges subjected his license to suspension. The firm’s attorney set the case for trial. On the day of trial the Prosecutor agreed to amend the DUI to reckless driving and to conditions that would save our client’s license from suspension.
Client was involved in a single car accident and was observed at the scene to have watery eyes, a slow & slurred speech pattern, and an overwhelming odor of alcohol on his person. He refused both FSEs and a breath test, and was arrested for DUI. Through defense counsel's investigation it was discovered that the Client suffered from a seizure disorder in which the symptoms of a seizure closely mimicked those of intoxication. Defense counsel provided proof of this condition to the State, as well as statements from family members describing how the seizures appeared to an outside observer, and the DUI was dismissed.
The client committed a battery on her partner in front of law enforcement. After setting a stand your ground hearing, the State amended their original offer of the extensive Batters Intervention Program for domestic violence, to a 12 week anger management diversion which can be completed in 3 months. Upon the completion of the diversion, the case will be dropped completely.
Client was charged with a DUI after causing an accident and performing poorly on her roadside exercises. The Client also refused a breath sample. Because she was involved in accident the State would not agree to drop the charge to a reckless driving. However, once she retained the Firm, the Firm was able to convince the State that even though she did not perform well, she did have some medical issues that could possibly explain some of her poor performance, and this could be a risk for the State at trial. After considering the Firm's argument, the State agreed to drop the DUI charge.
