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

Dec 13, 2017 Case: 2017-CT-000754 Judge McGarity
Facts: The defendant was stopped for driving without his seat belt. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol and thick tongued speech. The defendant admitted to drinking 3 beers. An open cold beer was found in the car, along with closed beer cans. He refused to perform the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense: Parks & Braxton had many pretrial discussions with the State prior to trial.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Dec 12, 2017 Case: 17--MM-001420 Judge J. Martin
Facts: THIS IS A BUI CASE – BOATING UNDER THE INFLUENCE. The defendant's boat was boarded by Florida Fish and Wildlife police for a light violation. Upon contact with the defendant, officers noted him to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and talked as if he had a dry mouth. The defendant stated he had drank about 4 to 5 beers, and smoke some pot. Due to the fact the defendant had been out on the water, the officers administered nonphysical field sobriety tests. They included the HGN (eye test), finger to nose, palm pat, and hand coordination tests. He was then arrested for boating under the influence. A search incident to arrest revealed a baggie of marijuana and a pipe. He was also charged with possession of marijuana and possession of paraphernalia. After his arrest, he blew a .109 and .105 in the breath machine.
Defense: The firm noted that each officer had written a different report. On each report, they all made contradictory statements and observations of the defendant. Also, the roadside test report was vaguely written with hardly any specific details. The State Dropped the BUI and the defendant also received no convictions for the two possession charges.
Result: The State dropped the BUI.
Dec 12, 2017 Case: 14-0002369MU10A Judge Lerner-Wren
Facts: The defendant was stopped for straddling the bicycle lane and almost striking other vehicles. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, red eyes, and a flushed face. The defendant then performed the walk and turn, finger to nose, and HGN (eye test) exercises. For example, on the walk and turn, he missed heel to toe, stumbled, and took an incorrect number of steps. On the finger to nose, he kept his eyes open and missed the tip of his nose. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense: The defendant had a very thick Spanish accent and was also speaking Spanish. The officer, who did not speak Spanish, did not ever call for a translator. It was clear form the tape that there was a language barrier and any impairment was not due to alcohol, but due to the language barrier.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Dec 12, 2017 Case: 14-0002369MU10A Judge Lerner-Wren
Facts: The defendant was stopped for straddling the bicycle lane and almost striking other vehicles. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, red eyes, and a flushed face. The defendant then performed the walk and turn, finger to nose, and HGN (eye test) exercises. For example, on the walk and turn, he missed heel to toe, stumbled, and took an incorrect number of steps. On the finger to nose, he kept his eyes open and missed the tip of his nose. He was then arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense: The defendant had a very thick Spanish accent and was also speaking Spanish. The officer, who did not speak Spanish, did not ever call for a translator. It was clear form the tape that there was a language barrier and any impairment was not due to alcohol, but due to the language barrier.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Dec 12, 2017 Case: 17--MM-001420 Judge J. Martin
Facts: THIS IS A BUI CASE – BOATING UNDER THE INFLUENCE. The defendant's boat was boarded by Florida Fish and Wildlife police for a light violation. Upon contact with the defendant, officers noted him to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and talked as if he had a dry mouth. The defendant stated he had drank about 4 to 5 beers, and smoke some pot. Due to the fact the defendant had been out on the water, the officers administered nonphysical field sobriety tests. They included the HGN (eye test), finger to nose, palm pat, and hand coordination tests. He was then arrested for boating under the influence. A search incident to arrest revealed a baggie of marijuana and a pipe. He was also charged with possession of marijuana and possession of paraphernalia. After his arrest, he blew a .109 and .105 in the breath machine.
Defense: The firm noted that each officer had written a different report. On each report, they all made contradictory statements and observations of the defendant. Also, the roadside test report was vaguely written with hardly any specific details. The State Dropped the BUI and the defendant also received no convictions for the two possession charges.
Result: The State dropped the BUI.
Dec 11, 2017 Case: 17-000048TTAXMX Judge Cowden for Judge Riteneour
Facts: The defendant was involved in a sideswipe crash. When the officer arrived, he noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred/mumbled speech, and watery eyes. The defendant stated he had also taken Xanax and muscle relaxers earlier that morning. He was also observed to have been stumbling. The defendant then performed the HGN (eye test) and finger to nose tests. The walk and turn and one leg stand tests were not administered due to the defendant's prior injuries. He was then arrested for DUI. This was the defendant's Second DUI arrest and he was also charged with Second or subsequent refusal to provide a breath test and/or urine test.
Defense: The firm pointed out to the State that the HGN would not be admissible into evidence because the officer was not a DRE (drug recognition expert). In addition, since the officer did not read the defendant his Miranda rights, all of the defendant's statements about the drugs would have been excluded from evidence pursuant to the accident report privilege. Furthermore, there were conflicting stories as to who caused the crash. Finally, the firm pointed out that the video never showed the defendant stumbling or speaking with a slurred/mumbled voice. The State Dropped the DUI and the Second Refusal charge was Dismissed.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Dec 11, 2017 Case: 17-000048TTAXMX Judge Cowden for Judge Riteneour
Facts: The defendant was involved in a sideswipe crash. When the officer arrived, he noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred/mumbled speech, and watery eyes. The defendant stated he had also taken Xanax and muscle relaxers earlier that morning. He was also observed to have been stumbling. The defendant then performed the HGN (eye test) and finger to nose tests. The walk and turn and one leg stand tests were not administered due to the defendant's prior injuries. He was then arrested for DUI. This was the defendant's Second DUI arrest and he was also charged with Second or subsequent refusal to provide a breath test and/or urine test.
Defense: The firm pointed out to the State that the HGN would not be admissible into evidence because the officer was not a DRE (drug recognition expert). In addition, since the officer did not read the defendant his Miranda rights, all of the defendant's statements about the drugs would have been excluded from evidence pursuant to the accident report privilege. Furthermore, there were conflicting stories as to who caused the crash. Finally, the firm pointed out that the video never showed the defendant stumbling or speaking with a slurred/mumbled voice. The State Dropped the DUI and the Second Refusal charge was Dismissed.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Dec 6, 2017 Case: 17-CT-006257 Judge Myers
Facts: The defendant was stopped for driving in a reckless manner and speeding. Officers noted the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and a drowsy appearance. He also had droopy eyelids and red/glassy eyes. He was unsteady and off balance. He then performed the field sobriety tests and was subsequently arrested for DUI. This was the defendant's THIRD DUI arrest this year.
Defense: The video contradicted the officer's reports and this was brought to the State's attention. Just prior to trial, the State Dropped the DUI. It should be noted, Parks & Braxton represented this client on all three of his DUI cases this year. The firm won all three DUI's and the defendant did NOT receive one DUI conviction on his record.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Dec 6, 2017 Case: 17-CT-006257 Judge Myers
Facts: The defendant was stopped for driving in a reckless manner and speeding. Officers noted the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and a drowsy appearance. He also had droopy eyelids and red/glassy eyes. He was unsteady and off balance. He then performed the field sobriety tests and was subsequently arrested for DUI. This was the defendant's THIRD DUI arrest this year.
Defense: The video contradicted the officer's reports and this was brought to the State's attention. Just prior to trial, the State Dropped the DUI. It should be noted, Parks & Braxton represented this client on all three of his DUI cases this year. The firm won all three DUI's and the defendant did NOT receive one DUI conviction on his record.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Nov 29, 2017 Case: A760BZE Judge Bedinghaus
Facts: The defendant was found the by the police passed out and slumped over the wheel at an intersection. Officers observed the defendant to have bloodshot/glassy eyes, he was very unsteady, and swayed while he stood. The officer, having not observed an odor of alcohol, believed that the defendant was impaired by a chemical and/or controlled substance based on the defendant telling him he had been taking pain medication by the dentist for a dental procedure earlier that week. The defendant then performed the roadside tests. For example, on the walk and turn, he took an incorrect number of steps, stepped off the line, did not touch heel to toe, and lost his balance during the turn. He was then arrested for DUI. He subsequently refused both a breath and urine test.
Defense: The defendant wasn't able to articulate what specific medication he had been taking. Under Florida law, a defendant, to be convicted of DUI, must either be impaired by alcohol and/or a chemical and/or a controlled substance. Here, the State could not prove by which specific chemical and/or controlled substance was impairing the defendant as required by Florida Statute 316.193. This was brought to the State’s attention during pretrial discussions. The State Dropped the DUI to civil traffic infraction
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Nov 29, 2017 Case: 2017-CT-015660 Judge McNeil
Facts: The defendant was involved in a sideswipe crash. When the officer arrived, he noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. The defendant was making unusual statements and denied drinking. The defendant then performed the walk and turn, one leg stand, and finger to nose tests. He was then arrested for DUI. This was the defendant's Third DUI.
Defense: First, there were two different stories of how the accident occurred and who was actually at fault. Also, the defendant told the officer prior the field sobriety tests that he had a screw in his right ankle from breaking it years ago. In addition, he told him he was under the care of a doctor for the injury. The officer still proceeded to administer the one leg stand and walk and turn tests. The defense provided the medical records as proof to the State. There was doubt as to whether the defendant's alleged impairment was due to alcohol or the injuries he had sustained.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Nov 29, 2017 Case: A760BZE Judge Bedinghaus
Facts: The defendant was found the by the police passed out and slumped over the wheel at an intersection. Officers observed the defendant to have bloodshot/glassy eyes, he was very unsteady, and swayed while he stood. The officer, having not observed an odor of alcohol, believed that the defendant was impaired by a chemical and/or controlled substance based on the defendant telling him he had been taking pain medication by the dentist for a dental procedure earlier that week. The defendant then performed the roadside tests. For example, on the walk and turn, he took an incorrect number of steps, stepped off the line, did not touch heel to toe, and lost his balance during the turn. He was then arrested for DUI. He subsequently refused both a breath and urine test.
Defense: The defendant wasn't able to articulate what specific medication he had been taking. Under Florida law, a defendant, to be convicted of DUI, must either be impaired by alcohol and/or a chemical and/or a controlled substance. Here, the State could not prove by which specific chemical and/or controlled substance was impairing the defendant as required by Florida Statute 316.193. This was brought to the State’s attention during pretrial discussions. The State Dropped the DUI to civil traffic infraction
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Nov 29, 2017 Case: 2017-CT-015660 Judge McNeil
Facts: The defendant was involved in a sideswipe crash. When the officer arrived, he noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. The defendant was making unusual statements and denied drinking. The defendant then performed the walk and turn, one leg stand, and finger to nose tests. He was then arrested for DUI. This was the defendant's Third DUI.
Defense: First, there were two different stories of how the accident occurred and who was actually at fault. Also, the defendant told the officer prior the field sobriety tests that he had a screw in his right ankle from breaking it years ago. In addition, he told him he was under the care of a doctor for the injury. The officer still proceeded to administer the one leg stand and walk and turn tests. The defense provided the medical records as proof to the State. There was doubt as to whether the defendant's alleged impairment was due to alcohol or the injuries he had sustained.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Nov 22, 2017 Case: 2017-CT-007425 Judge Cameron
Facts: The defendant was stopped for weaving in and out of his lane of travel. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he appeared confused and disoriented. He admitted to having consumed 3 bourbons. The defendant was off balance and stumbled while exiting the car. He then performed very poorly on the field sobriety tasks. For example, he almost fell over while walking the line. The defendant was arrested for DUI and subsequently blew .175 and .170 in the breath machine.
Defense: After pretrial negotiations with the State, they Dropped the DUI short of a trial.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Nov 22, 2017 Case: 2017-CT-007425 Judge Cameron
Facts: The defendant was stopped for weaving in and out of his lane of travel. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he appeared confused and disoriented. He admitted to having consumed 3 bourbons. The defendant was off balance and stumbled while exiting the car. He then performed very poorly on the field sobriety tasks. For example, he almost fell over while walking the line. The defendant was arrested for DUI and subsequently blew .175 and .170 in the breath machine.
Defense: After pretrial negotiations with the State, they Dropped the DUI short of a trial.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Nov 20, 2017 Case: 2017-CT-000558AX Judge Henderson
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding. Upon contact, the officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol and slurred/thick tongued speech. The officer could smell the alcohol from six feet away. The defendant performed the field sobriety tests such as the walk and turn, one leg stand, and HGN (eye test). He was then arrested for DUI.
Defense: It was clear from the officer's reports describing the defendant's performance on the roadside tasks that they were contradictory to the video tape. In fact, the officer had written a females name when describing the roadside tasks, and not the defendant's in certain parts of the report. Thus, the question then became, was the officer writing about this defendant or another. His credibility was now called into question.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Nov 20, 2017 Case: 2017-CT-000558AX Judge Henderson
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding. Upon contact, the officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol and slurred/thick tongued speech. The officer could smell the alcohol from six feet away. The defendant performed the field sobriety tests such as the walk and turn, one leg stand, and HGN (eye test). He was then arrested for DUI.
Defense: It was clear from the officer's reports describing the defendant's performance on the roadside tasks that they were contradictory to the video tape. In fact, the officer had written a females name when describing the roadside tasks, and not the defendant's in certain parts of the report. Thus, the question then became, was the officer writing about this defendant or another. His credibility was now called into question.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Nov 16, 2017 Case: 2017-CT-031179 Judge T. Brown
Facts: The defendant was stopped for driving with no rear lights illuminated. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and was slow in her movements. She then performed the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand tests. She was arrested for DUI and subsequently blew a .101 and .094 in the breath machine.
Defense: The firm pointed out with the .02 margin of error in the breath machine, one of the defendant's breath tests results would have been under the legal limit. In addition, on video, we pointed out to the State that the officer conducting the roadside tests was a trainee. It was clear from the tape that she was unsure whether to arrest the defendant as she had to consult with the FTO (field training officer) a few times. In addition, on the HGN (eye test), there was no angle of onset in the defendant's eyes prior to 45 degrees. That would indicate, under Tharpe's Formula, the defendant's breath alcohol level would have been under the legal limit.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Nov 16, 2017 Case: 2017-CT-030408 Judge T. Brown
Facts: The defendant was found by police passed out in his car in a parking lot. Upon awakening the defendant, the officer observed him to have an odor of alcohol and bloodshot eyes. He exited the car slowly and and swayed while he stood. He was then asked to perform the field sobriety tests. According to the officer, he failed and was arrested for DUI.
Defense: The defendant was not in actual physical control of the vehicle even though the engine was running. Per the jury instruction on actual physical control, one has to have the "capability" to operate a motor vehicle. Here, he could not be "capable" of operating the car because he was sleeping. The State dropped the DUI and the defendant received no conviction on his record.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Nov 16, 2017 Case: 2017-CT-025541 Judge T. Brown
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding and following too closely. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, and mumbled speech. He also had a flushed face, staggered while walking, and swayed while he stood. He was then asked to perform the field sobriety tests. He was then arrested for DUI and subsequently refused the breath test.
Defense: Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State that the defendant did not speak any English on video tape. Yet, the officer who only spoke English, was trying to get the defendant to understand the instructions to the roadside tests by having read the instructions himself in Spanish from a card. This was a direct violation of the NHTSA rules on roadsides They require that an officer explain and then demonstrate the tests, not hand an instruction card to a defendant. Furthermore, the video contradicted the officer's report as the defendant was not staggering or swaying on tape.
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.