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

Mar 23, 2017 Case: 15-025118MU10A Judge Gottlieb
Facts: The defendant was stopped for driving the wrong way down a one way street. Once stopped, the officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, very glassy eyes, and she fumbled retrieving her documents. The defendant stated that she had drank two glasses of white wine. The defendant appeared to be off balance upon exiting the car. She then performed the roadside tests which were not video taped. She was then arrested for DUI and subsequently refused the breath test.
Defense: Parks & Braxton met with the State prior to trial. We pointed out that none of the roadside tests were specifically detailed. In fact, the reports were very vaguely written. Prior to trial, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State Dropped the DUI.
Mar 17, 2017 Case: 16-CT-014684 Judge Hanser
Facts: The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash. When the officer arrived, he noticed that the defendant had an odor of alcohol and glazed/glassy eyes. The defendant stated she had consumed three margaritas. She then performed the field sobriety tests on video tape and was subsequently arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she blew a .149 and .149 in the breath machine.
Defense: Under Florida law, a person can only be convicted of DUI if "while driving" they had a breath alcohol level of .08 of higher. Here, under the the theory of retrograde extrapolation (ie. going back in time to calculate the defendant's BAC level earlier), it was shown by the defense that she may have been under the legal limit at the time of the driving.
Result: The State Dropped the DUI.
Mar 17, 2017 Case: 16-CT-014684 Judge Hanser
Facts: The defendant was the at fault driver in a rear end crash. When the officer arrived, he noticed that the defendant had an odor of alcohol and glazed/glassy eyes. The defendant stated she had consumed three margaritas. She then performed the field sobriety tests on video tape and was subsequently arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she blew a .149 and .149 in the breath machine.
Defense: Under Florida law, a person can only be convicted of DUI if "while driving" they had a breath alcohol level of .08 of higher. Here, under the the theory of retrograde extrapolation (ie. going back in time to calculate the defendant's BAC level earlier), it was shown by the defense that she may have been under the legal limit at the time of the driving.
Result: The State Dropped the DUI.
Mar 7, 2017 Case: 16-CT-503610 Judge Swett
Facts: The defendant was stopped by the police for driving on the rims of her blown out tires. A caller had called 911 alerting the police to her car prior to the traffic stop as she had been driving recklessly. The defendant had an odor of alcohol, mumble/slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. The defendant performed the roadside tests. For example, on both the finger to nose and one leg stand tests, she almost fell over so the exercises were stopped. She was then arrested for DUI and subsequently blew a .102 and .100 in the breath machine.
Defense: Under Florida law, the State is required to provide all discovery in their possession as well as in the possession of the police department. If all the evidence is not turned over to the defense in a timely fashion, the State would be prevented from using it against he defendant. Due to various discovery issues, the State Dropped the DUI on the day of trial.
Result: The State Dropped the DUI.
Mar 7, 2017 Case: 16-CT-503610 Judge Swett
Facts: The defendant was stopped by the police for driving on the rims of her blown out tires. A caller had called 911 alerting the police to her car prior to the traffic stop as she had been driving recklessly. The defendant had an odor of alcohol, mumble/slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. The defendant performed the roadside tests. For example, on both the finger to nose and one leg stand tests, she almost fell over so the exercises were stopped. She was then arrested for DUI and subsequently blew a .102 and .100 in the breath machine.
Defense: Under Florida law, the State is required to provide all discovery in their possession as well as in the possession of the police department. If all the evidence is not turned over to the defense in a timely fashion, the State would be prevented from using it against he defendant. Due to various discovery issues, the State Dropped the DUI on the day of trial.
Result: The State Dropped the DUI.
Mar 6, 2017 Case: 2016-CM-009424 Judge Lefler
Facts: The defendant was stopped for driving the wrong way down a one way street. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol and glassy eyes. The defendant admitted to drinking beer at "The World of Beer." The defendant then performed the walk and turn, HGN (eye test), one leg stand, and finger to nose tests. After doing them, he was arrested for DUI and subsequently refused the breath test. In a search incident to arrest, the officer found marijuana and a glass pipe. The defendant was also charged with possession of marijuana and possession of paraphernalia. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
Defense: Under Florida law, a defendant who is agreeing to perform roadside tests cannot be coerced into doing them by a misstatement of the law. Here, the defendant relied upon misinformation from the officer about the potential consequences of performing them vs. not performing them. The State agreed and Dropped the DUI. The two possession charges were also Dismissed.
Result: The State Dropped the DUI.
Mar 6, 2017 Case: 2016-CM-009424 Judge Lefler
Facts: The defendant was stopped for driving the wrong way down a one way street. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol and glassy eyes. The defendant admitted to drinking beer at "The World of Beer." The defendant then performed the walk and turn, HGN (eye test), one leg stand, and finger to nose tests. After doing them, he was arrested for DUI and subsequently refused the breath test. In a search incident to arrest, the officer found marijuana and a glass pipe. The defendant was also charged with possession of marijuana and possession of paraphernalia. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
Defense: Under Florida law, a defendant who is agreeing to perform roadside tests cannot be coerced into doing them by a misstatement of the law. Here, the defendant relied upon misinformation from the officer about the potential consequences of performing them vs. not performing them. The State agreed and Dropped the DUI. The two possession charges were also Dismissed.
Result: The State Dropped the DUI.
Feb 17, 2017 Case: 2016-CT-011561AXXX Judge Hanser
Facts: The defendant was stopped for having an expired tag. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He also had difficulty completing sentences at times. The defendant stated that he had consumed one beer. The defendant then performed the roadside tests. For example, on the walk and turn, he stepped off the line and took an incorrect number of steps. On the one leg stand, he put his foot down and swayed. He was then arrested for DUI.
Defense: Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. During pretrial negotiations, we pointed out various conflicts in the officer's reports versus what was on the video tape.
Result: The State Dropped the DUI.
Feb 17, 2017 Case: 2016-CT-011561AXXX Judge Hanser
Facts: The defendant was stopped for having an expired tag. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He also had difficulty completing sentences at times. The defendant stated that he had consumed one beer. The defendant then performed the roadside tests. For example, on the walk and turn, he stepped off the line and took an incorrect number of steps. On the one leg stand, he put his foot down and swayed. He was then arrested for DUI.
Defense: Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. During pretrial negotiations, we pointed out various conflicts in the officer's reports versus what was on the video tape.
Result: The State Dropped the DUI.
Feb 16, 2017 Case: 7367-XFF Judge Newman
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding and weaving. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and a flushed face. He also swayed while he stood and had bloodshot eyes. The defendant was then asked to perform the roadside tests. According to the officer, he did not perform to standards and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
Defense: Parks & Braxton brought to the State's attention documentation that the defendant suffered from serious mental health issues. This caused speech issues for the defendant as well as a lack of comprehension when he was being instructed on the field sobriety tests.
Result: The State Dropped the DUI.
Feb 16, 2017 Case: 7367-XFF Judge Newman
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding and weaving. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and a flushed face. He also swayed while he stood and had bloodshot eyes. The defendant was then asked to perform the roadside tests. According to the officer, he did not perform to standards and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
Defense: Parks & Braxton brought to the State's attention documentation that the defendant suffered from serious mental health issues. This caused speech issues for the defendant as well as a lack of comprehension when he was being instructed on the field sobriety tests.
Result: The State Dropped the DUI.
Feb 14, 2017 Case: 2016-CT-503301 Judge Gonzalez
Facts: The defendant was stopped for swerving. Upon stopping the defendant, the officer observed an odor of alcohol, as well as an odor of marijuana coming from the defendant. The officer noticed slurred speech, glossy eyes, and the defendant fumbled with his items. The defendant had crumbs on his shorts which appeared to be marijuana to the officer. The defendant was then asked to perform roadside tasks. For example, on the walk and turn, the defendant stepped off the line, took an incorrect number of steps, and used his arms for balance. On the one leg stand, he put his foot down and used his arms for balance. After his arrest for DUI, he refused a breath and urine sample. The officer also found marijuana and drug paraphernalia in a search incident to arrest. The defendant was also charged with possession of marijuana and paraphernalia.
Defense: Parks & Braxton had pretrial discussions with the State on the day of the trial. We pointed out various contradictions within the officer's reports. Furthermore, there were contradictions in his reports versus what was captured on tape. The State Dropped the DUI and Dismissed the two possession charges.
Result: The State Dropped the DUI.
Feb 14, 2017 Case: 2016-CT-503301 Judge Gonzalez
Facts: The defendant was stopped for swerving. Upon stopping the defendant, the officer observed an odor of alcohol, as well as an odor of marijuana coming from the defendant. The officer noticed slurred speech, glossy eyes, and the defendant fumbled with his items. The defendant had crumbs on his shorts which appeared to be marijuana to the officer. The defendant was then asked to perform roadside tasks. For example, on the walk and turn, the defendant stepped off the line, took an incorrect number of steps, and used his arms for balance. On the one leg stand, he put his foot down and used his arms for balance. After his arrest for DUI, he refused a breath and urine sample. The officer also found marijuana and drug paraphernalia in a search incident to arrest. The defendant was also charged with possession of marijuana and paraphernalia.
Defense: Parks & Braxton had pretrial discussions with the State on the day of the trial. We pointed out various contradictions within the officer's reports. Furthermore, there were contradictions in his reports versus what was captured on tape. The State Dropped the DUI and Dismissed the two possession charges.
Result: The State Dropped the DUI.
Feb 1, 2017 Case: 2015-CT-048387 Judge Koons
Facts: An anonymous caller called 911 stating they observed a "reckless driver unable to maintain a lane of travel." The officer spotted the vehicle in question, which was the defendant, and observed him touch a lane marker one time. The officer then initiated a traffic stop. Upon contact, the officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he stated he had consumed 3 to 4 beers. He then performed the field sobriety exercises and was subsequently arrested for DUI. The defendant stated after his rights were read that he felt the effects of the alcohol and should not have been driving. He also blew a .123 and .120 in the breath machine.
Defense: Parks & Braxton filed a pre-trial motion to suppress. In our motion, we alleged that the defendant was unlawfully stopped by the police. Pursuant to the Florida and U.S. Supreme Courts, in order to stop a defendant based on an anonymous tip, the officer must corroborate the tip. Here, the officer did not observe any reckless driving, nor any failure to maintain a lane of travel. In fact, the officer wrote in her report the defendant "crossed" over the white line of travel. However, on video, the defendant merely touched the lane marker. Prior to the motion hearing date, the state agreed to drop the DUI based on the case law.
Result: The State Dropped the DUI.
Feb 1, 2017 Case: 2015-CT-048387 Judge Koons
Facts: An anonymous caller called 911 stating they observed a "reckless driver unable to maintain a lane of travel." The officer spotted the vehicle in question, which was the defendant, and observed him touch a lane marker one time. The officer then initiated a traffic stop. Upon contact, the officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he stated he had consumed 3 to 4 beers. He then performed the field sobriety exercises and was subsequently arrested for DUI. The defendant stated after his rights were read that he felt the effects of the alcohol and should not have been driving. He also blew a .123 and .120 in the breath machine.
Defense: Parks & Braxton filed a pre-trial motion to suppress. In our motion, we alleged that the defendant was unlawfully stopped by the police. Pursuant to the Florida and U.S. Supreme Courts, in order to stop a defendant based on an anonymous tip, the officer must corroborate the tip. Here, the officer did not observe any reckless driving, nor any failure to maintain a lane of travel. In fact, the officer wrote in her report the defendant "crossed" over the white line of travel. However, on video, the defendant merely touched the lane marker. Prior to the motion hearing date, the state agreed to drop the DUI based on the case law.
Result: The State Dropped the DUI.
Jan 26, 2017 Case: 2016-CT-017199 Judge Bryson
Facts: The defendant was stopped for weaving and swerving. The officer observed the defendant to have blood shot eyes and she was confused in providing the appropriate documents to the officer. The officer noticed what he believed to be and alcoholic beverage in her car. Believing she was impaired, he requested her to perform roadside tests. For example, on the one leg stand, she almost fell over and asked if she had to count to 600, not 30 as instructed. On the walk and turn, the defendant crisscrossed her feet, did not touch heel to toe, and and instead of counting out loud, she raised her fingers to her nose. She was then arrested for DUI. Subsequently, she refused both breath and urine tests.
Defense: In Florida, to be convicted of DUI, a defendant must be impaired by alcohol, a chemical and/or chemical controlled substance. Here the State could not prove by what substance the defendant was allegedly impaired by as there was no odor of alcohol noted.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jan 26, 2017 Case: 2016-CT-017199 Judge Bryson
Facts: The defendant was stopped for weaving and swerving. The officer observed the defendant to have blood shot eyes and she was confused in providing the appropriate documents to the officer. The officer noticed what he believed to be and alcoholic beverage in her car. Believing she was impaired, he requested her to perform roadside tests. For example, on the one leg stand, she almost fell over and asked if she had to count to 600, not 30 as instructed. On the walk and turn, the defendant crisscrossed her feet, did not touch heel to toe, and and instead of counting out loud, she raised her fingers to her nose. She was then arrested for DUI. Subsequently, she refused both breath and urine tests.
Defense: In Florida, to be convicted of DUI, a defendant must be impaired by alcohol, a chemical and/or chemical controlled substance. Here the State could not prove by what substance the defendant was allegedly impaired by as there was no odor of alcohol noted.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jan 23, 2017 Case: 8505-XEZ Judge Riba
Facts: The defendant was first observed by an undercover Detective as the defendant appeared to be following behind him for a lengthy period of time and distance. The detective radioed out that he believed he was being followed. Another Deputy then got behind the defendant and observed him slow down, brake heavily, and almost come to a stop in the roadway. The officer turned on his lights and sirens and pulled the defendant over. He then called for a DUI unit. Upon the DUI officer making contact, the officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glossy/droopy eyes. The defendant then performed the roadside tests. He failed them and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, the defendant stated that he did not want to take a breath test because he did not want to take the risk that he was over the legal limit.
Defense: Parks & Braxton filed a pretrial motion to suppress the lawfulness of the initial traffic stop. At the motion hearing, we argued the officer's belief that the defendant was following him did not rise to a "reasonable suspicion of a crime." Also, upon cross examination, the officers could not articulate any specific traffic infractions that were committed. Thus, there was no reasonable suspicion of a crime, nor probable cause to believe there were any any traffic infractions committed justifying the stop. Based on the testimony, case law provided, and legal argument, the Judge granted the motion and threw out all of the evidence.
Result: The DUI was Dismissed
Jan 23, 2017 Case: 2016-CT-022192 Judge Eissey
Facts: The defendant was stopped for weaving all over the road. The officer observed the defendant crossing over the white lane markers numerous times. Upon contact, the officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol and slurred speech. A DUI officer was then called to the scene. The defendant then performed the roadside tests. According to the officer, she exhibited several clues of impairment and was arrested for DUI. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
Defense: The defense brought to the State's attention that although the first cop smelled an odor of alcohol, the DUI cop did not. Also, the first officer stated he did not observe balance issues, yet the DUI officer wrote she was off balance. Also, the DUI officer did not observe the angle of onset in the defendant's eyes prior to 45 degrees on the HGN test, which would be present if one was impaired by alcohol. Due to the numerous conflicts between the two officer's testimony, the DUI was dismissed.
Result: The DUI was Dismissed.
Jan 23, 2017 Case: 2016-CT-022192 Judge Eissey
Facts: The defendant was stopped for weaving all over the road. The officer observed the defendant crossing over the white lane markers numerous times. Upon contact, the officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol and slurred speech. A DUI officer was then called to the scene. The defendant then performed the roadside tests. According to the officer, she exhibited several clues of impairment and was arrested for DUI. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
Defense: The defense brought to the State's attention that although the first cop smelled an odor of alcohol, the DUI cop did not. Also, the first officer stated he did not observe balance issues, yet the DUI officer wrote she was off balance. Also, the DUI officer did not observe the angle of onset in the defendant's eyes prior to 45 degrees on the HGN test, which would be present if one was impaired by alcohol. Due to the numerous conflicts between the two officer's testimony, the DUI was dismissed.
Result: The DUI was Dismissed.

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.