Parks & Braxton, PA: Miami DUI Lawyer | Criminal Defense

ALSO SERVING LEE, CHARLOTTE & ALL SOUTH WEST FLORIDA COUNTIES
Toll-Free
239.217.3723

Call 24/7 Nights, Weekends & Holidays

Free Consultations
ALSO SERVING LEE, CHARLOTTE & ALL SOUTH WEST FLORIDA COUNTIES
Toll-Free
239.217.3723
Call 24/7 Nights, Weekends & Holidays
Free Consultations
Call
Email
Map

OUR RECENT VICTORIES

Oct 8, 2020 Case: 20-CT-030801 Judge Peacock
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol and bloodshot/glassy eyes. The officer then requested that she perform numerous field sobriety tests. The officer alleged that she failed and she was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .163 and a .149 in the breath machine.
Defense: In order to request field sobriety tests, the officer must have reasonable suspicion of a crime. In other words, there must be facts that would lead an officer to believe one was impaired by alcohol. Here, the observations made only led one to believe that she had consumed alcohol and not that she was impaired. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Oct 8, 2020 Case: 20-CT-026307 Judge Peacock
Facts: The defendant was stopped for weaving. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and a pale face. The defendant swayed, fumbled with his items, and was slow to respond to questions. He performed very poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .128 and a .128 in the breath machine.
Defense: Due to vagueness of the defendant's alleged driving pattern as written in the police reports (i.e. the weaving), the lawfulness of the traffic stop was called into question. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Oct 8, 2020 Case: 20-CT-030801 Judge Peacock
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol and bloodshot/glassy eyes. The officer then requested that she perform numerous field sobriety tests. The officer alleged that she failed and she was arrested for DUI. She later blew a .163 and a .149 in the breath machine.
Defense: In order to request field sobriety tests, the officer must have reasonable suspicion of a crime. In other words, there must be facts that would lead an officer to believe one was impaired by alcohol. Here, the observations made only led one to believe that she had consumed alcohol and not that she was impaired. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Oct 7, 2020 Case: 20-CT-501549 Judge Swett
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol and watery/bloodshot eyes. The defendant then performed the HGN (eye test), walk turn, and one leg stand field sobriety exercises. According the officer, she performed poorly and was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test.
Defense: There was no video in the case. The firm pointed out to the State that the officer's reports contradicted each other as to many specifics of the defendant's performance on the field sobriety tests. Due to the conflicts in the reports, the officer's credibility was called into question.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Oct 7, 2020 Case: 20-CT-501549 Judge Swett
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol and watery/bloodshot eyes. The defendant then performed the HGN (eye test), walk turn, and one leg stand field sobriety exercises. According the officer, she performed poorly and was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test.
Defense: There was no video in the case. The firm pointed out to the State that the officer's reports contradicted each other as to many specifics of the defendant's performance on the field sobriety tests. Due to the conflicts in the reports, the officer's credibility was called into question.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Oct 6, 2020 Case: 19-CT-015003 Judge Conrad
Facts: The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash. There was no odor of alcohol. The defendant's speech was slow and lethargic. He had constricted pupils, droopy eyelids, and slow speech. The officer believed he was impaired by drugs, and not alcohol. He performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later provided a urine sample which revealed positive results for numerous illegal non prescribed controlled substances.
Defense: The defendant's video tape contradicted the officers written observations. Furthermore, the State couldn't prove that he was under the influence of those drugs that he tested positive for because the police never called a DRE (drug recognition officer) officer to do an evaluation.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Oct 6, 2020 Case: 19-CT-015003 Judge Conrad
Facts: The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash. There was no odor of alcohol. The defendant's speech was slow and lethargic. He had constricted pupils, droopy eyelids, and slow speech. The officer believed he was impaired by drugs, and not alcohol. He performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later provided a urine sample which revealed positive results for numerous illegal non prescribed controlled substances.
Defense: The defendant's video tape contradicted the officers written observations. Furthermore, the State couldn't prove that he was under the influence of those drugs that he tested positive for because the police never called a DRE (drug recognition officer) officer to do an evaluation.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Sep 29, 2020 Case: 19-005732MU10A Judge Carpenter-Toye
Facts: The defendant was stopped for both speeding and weaving. The initial officer smelled a strong odor of alcohol and noticed bloodshot watery eyes. The defendant admitted to both drinking alcohol and smoking marijuana. After noticing that the defendant's pupils were dilated, he called for a DUI task force officer. Upon arrival, the task force officer made the same observations and began to conduct a DUI investigation. The defendant refused to perform any sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. A search of the vehicle revealed THC oil canisters as well as a vape pen. Throughout the investigation the officers insisted that the defendant had body tremors consistent with both marijuana use as well as high levels of alcohol intoxication.
Defense: Parks & Braxton took independent statements (depositions) from the two officers. The statements were completely inconsistent with one another as well as with the video. Based on the inconsistencies by both officers the Prosecutor could not proceed to trial.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Sep 29, 2020 Case: 19-005732MU10A Judge Carpenter-Toye
Facts: The defendant was stopped for both speeding and weaving. The initial officer smelled a strong odor of alcohol and noticed bloodshot watery eyes. The defendant admitted to both drinking alcohol and smoking marijuana. After noticing that the defendant's pupils were dilated, he called for a DUI task force officer. Upon arrival, the task force officer made the same observations and began to conduct a DUI investigation. The defendant refused to perform any sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. A search of the vehicle revealed THC oil canisters as well as a vape pen. Throughout the investigation the officers insisted that the defendant had body tremors consistent with both marijuana use as well as high levels of alcohol intoxication.
Defense: Parks & Braxton took independent statements (depositions) from the two officers. The statements were completely inconsistent with one another as well as with the video. Based on the inconsistencies by both officers the Prosecutor could not proceed to trial.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Sep 23, 2020 Case: 20-CT-002962 Judge Gutman
Facts: The defendant was stopped for failing to maintain a single lane. She had an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and watery/red eyes. She also had fumbling fingers and there was some vomit in the car. She refused to do the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test.
Defense: The lawfulness of the traffic stop was called into question by the firm due to the fact that no other traffic was affected by her driving. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Sep 23, 2020 Case: 20-CT-002962 Judge Gutman
Facts: The defendant was stopped for failing to maintain a single lane. She had an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and watery/red eyes. She also had fumbling fingers and there was some vomit in the car. She refused to do the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test.
Defense: The lawfulness of the traffic stop was called into question by the firm due to the fact that no other traffic was affected by her driving. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Sep 22, 2020 Case: 20-CT-018465 Judge Babb
Facts: The defendant was stopped for driving south bound in the north bound lane and speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he swayed while he stood. The defendant refused to do the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense: When a defendant refuses to perform roadside tests, the officer must advise the person of adverse consequences for refusing. If they do not, the refusal gets excluded from evidence. Here, the officer did not advise the defendant of any adverse consequences when he refused. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Sep 22, 2020 Case: 20-CT-018465 Judge Babb
Facts: The defendant was stopped for driving south bound in the north bound lane and speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he swayed while he stood. The defendant refused to do the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense: When a defendant refuses to perform roadside tests, the officer must advise the person of adverse consequences for refusing. If they do not, the refusal gets excluded from evidence. Here, the officer did not advise the defendant of any adverse consequences when he refused. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Sep 15, 2020 Case: 19-CT-051810 Judge T. Brown
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding. The defendant had an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. He admitted to consuming two drinks and his movements were slow and unsure. After performing field sobriety tests such as the walk and turn, one leg stand, and HGN (eye test), he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense: The description of the defendant's performance on the roadside tests was vaguely written with hardly any specifics. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Sep 15, 2020 Case: 19-CT-051810 Judge T. Brown
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding. The defendant had an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. He admitted to consuming two drinks and his movements were slow and unsure. After performing field sobriety tests such as the walk and turn, one leg stand, and HGN (eye test), he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense: The description of the defendant's performance on the roadside tests was vaguely written with hardly any specifics. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Sep 10, 2020 Case: 19-CT-002407 Judge Militello
Facts: The defendant was stopped when officers observed her driving at a slow rate of speed and weaving. They observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. She was unsteady, swayed, and appeared confused. After performing several field sobriety tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test.
Defense: Due to some conflicts between the reports and the video tape, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Sep 10, 2020 Case: 19-CT-002407 Judge Militello
Facts: The defendant was stopped when officers observed her driving at a slow rate of speed and weaving. They observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. She was unsteady, swayed, and appeared confused. After performing several field sobriety tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test.
Defense: Due to some conflicts between the reports and the video tape, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Sep 9, 2020 Case: 19-CT-019691 Judge Gutman
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he admitted to having drank alcohol. He then performed numerous field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .093 and a .091 in the breath machine.
Defense: With the .02 margin of error in the breath machine, the firm was able to place the defendant's breath alcohol results under the legal limit. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Sep 9, 2020 Case: 20-CT-013607 Judge Jacobus
Facts: The defendant was stopped coming out of a bar parking lot. According to the officer, his car lost traction and accelerated heavily. The officer observed an odor of alcohol and glassy eyes. The defendant admitted to having drank IPA beers. He then performed roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .08 and a .08 in the breath machine.
Defense: In order to lawfully stop an individual, there must be probable cause to conduct the traffic stop. Here, since no traffic or pedestrians were affected by the defendant's actions of peeling out, the stop was unlawful. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Sep 9, 2020 Case: 19-CT-019691 Judge Gutman
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he admitted to having drank alcohol. He then performed numerous field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later blew a .093 and a .091 in the breath machine.
Defense: With the .02 margin of error in the breath machine, the firm was able to place the defendant's breath alcohol results under the legal limit. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.

OBTAIN IMMEDIATE LEGAL HELP

To save your license, you must act within 10 days. Get in touch with our firm by calling 239.217.3723, or fill out the form here.