Apr 19, 2022	Case: 21-CT-001005	Judge Burns
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for having no taillights on and drifting by crossing over the fog line. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol watery/bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. He also appeared unsteady and had to lean on his car for balance. He refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Third DUI arrest and also he was charged with a second refusal.
Defense:	The officer's reports were contradictory. For example, one officer stated that the defendant had slurred speech and the other stated he had good speech. One officer observed balance issues and the other did not. Also, there were contradictions between the administrative hearing testimony, as compared to the police reports.
Result:	The State Dropped the Defendant's Third DUI.

Apr 19, 2022	Case: 21-CT-014712	Judge Jeske
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for not having any headlights or tail lights illuminated. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, a blank/dazed stare, and watery eyes. She had droopy eye lids and fumbling fingers. She then performed roadside tests such as the walk and turn and one leg stand. She was subsequently arrested for DUI and later blew a .119 and .112 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The defendant's demeanor and performance on the roadside tests clearly showed she was absorbing alcohol and was under the .08 at the time of driving.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 19, 2022	Case: 21-CT-005297	Judge Farr
Facts:	The defendant was stopped after the officer noticed him drifting and crossing over the lane markers several times. The officer did not smell any alcohol, but noticed the defendant to appear lethargic, his speech was slurred, and his eyes were red and watery. His movements were slow and he performed poorly on roadside tests. He was then arrested for DUI and later asked to provide a urine sample as the officer believed he was impaired by drugs. The FDLE lab report showed positive results for marijuana and Xanax.
Defense:	The State could not prove that the drugs impaired him that day as they could have been in his system for days.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 19, 2022	Case: 21-CT-012838	Judge Jeske
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and unstable balance. The defendant admitted to having consumed four drinks. He then performed various field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	On tape, the defendant did not exhibit any unstable balance. In fact, he stood and walked quite normally. The officer exaggerated the level of impairment of the roadsides as compared to the video.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 19, 2022	Case: 21-CT-000592	Judge Nicola
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving and speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, red/glassy eyes, and a flushed face. The defendant had a stamp on his hand form a bar. He was asked to perform roadside tests, but he refused. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. Just prior trial, the firm pointed out to the State that the officer never even asked the defendant to step out of the car for the DUI investigation until he was being arrested. Thus, no-one could even see if he had any balance issues. Also, his speech was not slurred on tape. Furthermore, we provided case law to the State that the defendant's silence in not answering questions would be a violation of his Miranda rights.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 18, 2022	Case: 21-MM-000749	Judge Wallace
Facts:	The defendant was stopped after he was weaving all over the road for a lengthy period of time. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot watery eyes. Two unopened cases of beer were also spotted in the defendant's car. He was then asked to perform various roadside sobriety tests. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test. While being arrested, he allegedly pulled away and was tackled. He was also charged with resisting an officer without violence.
Defense:	Although the erratic driving pattern was captured on video tape, the officer at that point only had reasonable suspicion to believe the defendant was DUI. After the defendant performed well on the field sobriety tests on tape, there was now a lack of probable cause to arrest him for DUI. The defendant did perform well on video tape and was still arrested. On the day of trial, the State Dropped the DUI and also he received no criminal conviction on the resisting without violence charge.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 18, 2022	Case: 21-MM-000749	Judge Wallace
Facts:	The defendant was stopped after he was weaving all over the road for a lengthy period of time. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot watery eyes. Two unopened cases of beer were also spotted in the defendant's car. He was then asked to perform various roadside sobriety tests. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test. While being arrested, he allegedly pulled away and was tackled. He was also charged with resisting an officer without violence.
Defense:	Although the erratic driving pattern was captured on video tape, the officer at that point only had reasonable suspicion to believe the defendant was DUI. After the defendant performed well on the field sobriety tests on tape, there was now a lack of probable cause to arrest him for DUI. The defendant did perform well on video tape and was still arrested. On the day of trial, the State Dropped the DUI and also he received no criminal conviction on the resisting without violence charge.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 14, 2022	Case: 22-CT-000002	Judge Damico
Facts:	The defendant was stopped after she crossed over the double yellow lines into oncoming traffic. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant used the car for balance and stated she had consumed two mimosas. The defendant then performed various roadside tests such as the alphabet, finger to nose, and one leg stand exercises. She was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The roadside observations as written in reports were highly exaggerated as compared to the video. After several negotiations with the prosecutor, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 14, 2022	Case: 22-CT-000714	Judge Booras
Facts:	The defendant was stopped after she was observed drifting in and out of her lane. The front and rear tires also had no rubber attached to the rims. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and varying emotions. The defendant admitted to having drank beer. She performed various field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .146 and a .146 in the breath machine.
Defense:	After many negotiations with the prosecutor about the evidence, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 14, 2022	Case: 22-CT-000002	Judge Damico
Facts:	The defendant was stopped after she crossed over the double yellow lines into oncoming traffic. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant used the car for balance and stated she had consumed two mimosas. The defendant then performed various roadside tests such as the alphabet, finger to nose, and one leg stand exercises. She was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The roadside observations as written in reports were highly exaggerated as compared to the video. After several negotiations with the prosecutor, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 14, 2022	Case: 22-CT-000714	Judge Booras
Facts:	The defendant was stopped after she was observed drifting in and out of her lane. The front and rear tires also had no rubber attached to the rims. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and varying emotions. The defendant admitted to having drank beer. She performed various field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .146 and a .146 in the breath machine.
Defense:	After many negotiations with the prosecutor about the evidence, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 13, 2022	Case: 21-CM-009488	Judge Taylor
Facts:	The defendant was stopped on his boat because it had no lights. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and droopy eyelids. The defendant had trouble walking and using his fingertips. The defendant then performed various roadside tests designed for Boating under the influence cases, such as the palm pat, finger to nose, and hand coordination tests. He was then arrested for BUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	All the events were captured on a body worn camera. However, Florida Fish and Wildlife, the arresting agency, never turned it over to the prosecutor in discovery. The State Dropped the Boating under the Influence (BUI) and the defendant received no conviction on his record.
Result:	The State dropped the BUI.

Apr 13, 2022	Case: 21-CM-009488	Judge Taylor
Facts:	The defendant was stopped on his boat because it had no lights. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and droopy eyelids. The defendant had trouble walking and using his fingertips. The defendant then performed various roadside tests designed for Boating under the influence cases, such as the palm pat, finger to nose, and hand coordination tests. He was then arrested for BUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	All the events were captured on a body worn camera. However, Florida Fish and Wildlife, the arresting agency, never turned it over to the prosecutor in discovery. The State Dropped the Boating under the Influence (BUI) and the defendant received no conviction on his record.
Result:	The State dropped the BUI.

Apr 12, 2022	Case: 21-CT-002939AX	Judge J. Steele
Facts:	Several civilians notified the police that the defendant was a reckless driver and had just pulled into a KFC drive through. An officer walked up to the defendant and noticed he appeared sleepy and drinking from a metallic cup. The officer then asked the defendant to pull off to the side and the defendant took off. The officer went after him eventually initiating a traffic stop. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, very slurred speech, lethargic movements, and he admitted to having drank margaritas. He performed very poorly on roadside tests and was almost incoherent. He was arrested for DUI and later blew a .208 and a .193 in the breath machine.
Defense:	Based on the information provided which was very vague, a "reckless driver," without more, was legally insufficient for the officer to justify stopping the defendant. He made no specific DUI observations when he first went up to the car. The lawfulness of the traffic stop was called into question.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 12, 2022	Case: 21-CT-011754	Judge Oster
Facts:	Police were called out to a disturbance. The defendant was found in the driver's seat of a Polaris slingshot vehicle. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and an unstable balance. The defendant admitted to having consumed four beers. After performing roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI arrest. The firm beat his last Boating under the influence charge.
Defense:	There was a lack of reasonable suspicion of a crime due to a lack of specifics based on a "disturbance" call to detain the defendant. The State Dropped the Defendant's Second DUI and this is the Second time the firm beat the defendant's case.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 12, 2022	Case: 19-007943MU10A	Judge Brown
Facts:	The defendant was involved in a one car crash on the highway. The officers arrived on scene and made a series of observations consistent with impairment. The officers observed a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes and slurred speech. The defendant refused to perform any field sobriety tests. While on video, the defendant apologized for 30 straight minutes begging the officer to "cut him a break." The defendant admitted several times that he made a mistake and would not do it again. The defendant was arrested for DUI and subsequently refused a breath test. This was the defendant's second DUI within 6 months of his first offense.
Defense:	As a result of the crash, the defendant's car was completely inoperable. The defendant maintained that he did not begin drinking until after the crash. In addition, the firm presented a call log that proved that the defendant called the tow truck company shortly after the crash, and remained in the vehicle for over an hour until the police arrived. The law requires that the State prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the defendant was impaired at the time the vehicle was operable. Without evidence of intoxication at the time of the crash the State could not prove the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 12, 2022	Case: 21-CT-010991	Judge Oster
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for running a red light. The defendant had an odor of alcohol, red/glassy eyes, and was very belligerent. After performing the walk and turn and one leg stand exercises, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The defendant's performance on the roadside tests as written by the officer was contradicted by the video tape.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 12, 2022	Case: 19-007943MU10A	Judge Brown
Facts:	The defendant was involved in a one car crash on the highway. The officers arrived on scene and made a series of observations consistent with impairment. The officers observed a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes and slurred speech. The defendant refused to perform any field sobriety tests. While on video, the defendant apologized for 30 straight minutes begging the officer to "cut him a break." The defendant admitted several times that he made a mistake and would not do it again. The defendant was arrested for DUI and subsequently refused a breath test. This was the defendant's second DUI within 6 months of his first offense.
Defense:	As a result of the crash, the defendant's car was completely inoperable. The defendant maintained that he did not begin drinking until after the crash. In addition, the firm presented a call log that proved that the defendant called the tow truck company shortly after the crash, and remained in the vehicle for over an hour until the police arrived. The law requires that the State prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the defendant was impaired at the time the vehicle was operable. Without evidence of intoxication at the time of the crash the State could not prove the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 12, 2022	Case: 21-CT-002939AX	Judge J. Steele
Facts:	Several civilians notified the police that the defendant was a reckless driver and had just pulled into a KFC drive through. An officer walked up to the defendant and noticed he appeared sleepy and drinking from a metallic cup. The officer then asked the defendant to pull off to the side and the defendant took off. The officer went after him eventually initiating a traffic stop. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, very slurred speech, lethargic movements, and he admitted to having drank margaritas. He performed very poorly on roadside tests and was almost incoherent. He was arrested for DUI and later blew a .208 and a .193 in the breath machine.
Defense:	Based on the information provided which was very vague, a "reckless driver," without more, was legally insufficient for the officer to justify stopping the defendant. He made no specific DUI observations when he first went up to the car. The lawfulness of the traffic stop was called into question.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 12, 2022	Case: 21-CT-010991	Judge Oster
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for running a red light. The defendant had an odor of alcohol, red/glassy eyes, and was very belligerent. After performing the walk and turn and one leg stand exercises, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The defendant's performance on the roadside tests as written by the officer was contradicted by the video tape.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.