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

Apr 10, 2014 Case: CTC-98-399986VANC Judge Horrox
Facts: The defendant was involved in a single car crash as he hit a utility pole. When the officers arrived, they observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, a flushed face, and blood-shot eyes. When asked for his phone number, the defendant gave a "1-800 number" and stated that he forgot. The defendant was transported to the hospital due to his injuries. At the hospital, the police ordered that blood be drawn from the defendant. The results of the blood test showed the defendant had a blood alcohol content of a .292 and .290. This was the defendant's Fourth DUI.
Defense: Parks & Braxton conducted a pre-trial investigation after taking over the case from another law firm. Our firm found numerous problems with the toxicology lab, the VHS tape, and the witnesses.
Result: The DUI was dismissed.
Apr 10, 2014 Case: 59193-JA Judge Denaro
Facts: A police officer noticed the defendant drinking in a bar while the the officer was having a meal. The officer noticed that the defendant appeared very intoxicated. He then saw the defendant leave, get in his car, and start the engine. Upon contact, the officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, mumbled speech, a flushed face, and blood-shot eyes. The defendant performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .237 and .237 in the breath machine.
Defense: Parks & Braxton had pre-trial discussions with the State in order to get the DUI Dropped prior to a trial date.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Apr 10, 2014 Case: CTC-98-399986VANC Judge Horrox
Facts: The defendant was involved in a single car crash as he hit a utility pole. When the officers arrived, they observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, a flushed face, and blood-shot eyes. When asked for his phone number, the defendant gave a "1-800 number" and stated that he forgot. The defendant was transported to the hospital due to his injuries. At the hospital, the police ordered that blood be drawn from the defendant. The results of the blood test showed the defendant had a blood alcohol content of a .292 and .290. This was the defendant's Fourth DUI.
Defense: Parks & Braxton conducted a pre-trial investigation after taking over the case from another law firm. Our firm found numerous problems with the toxicology lab, the VHS tape, and the witnesses.
Result: The DUI was dismissed.
Apr 7, 2014 Case: 13-CT-505875 Judge Paluck
Facts: The defendant was stopped for driving with an inoperable tag light. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and blood-shot eyes. Once outside the car, the officer observed him swaying. On video tape, the defendant refused to perform the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
Defense: Parks & Braxton filed a pre-trial motion to suppress the defendant's refusal to perform the roadside tests. In our motion, we alleged that the officer never advised the defendant of any "adverse consequences" for his refusal to perform the tests. Prior to the motion hearing date, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Apr 7, 2014 Case: 13-CT-505875 Judge Paluck
Facts: The defendant was stopped for driving with an inoperable tag light. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and blood-shot eyes. Once outside the car, the officer observed him swaying. On video tape, the defendant refused to perform the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
Defense: Parks & Braxton filed a pre-trial motion to suppress the defendant's refusal to perform the roadside tests. In our motion, we alleged that the officer never advised the defendant of any "adverse consequences" for his refusal to perform the tests. Prior to the motion hearing date, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Apr 2, 2014 Case: 7996-HBI Judge Greco
Facts: The defendant was found by police passed out in his vehicle at an intersection. Once the police finally awoke the defendant, the officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and blood-shot eyes. He also appeared unsteady outside the vehicle. According to the officer, he failed the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he tested positive for alcohol on the breath machine. However, the officer felt he was impaired by a chemical and / or controlled substance.
Defense: Parks & Braxton were ready for trial. The State would have been unable to prove by what "specific" chemical and / or controlled substance the officer thought was allegedly impairing the defendant as required by Florida Law.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Apr 2, 2014 Case: 7996-HBI Judge Greco
Facts: The defendant was found by police passed out in his vehicle at an intersection. Once the police finally awoke the defendant, the officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and blood-shot eyes. He also appeared unsteady outside the vehicle. According to the officer, he failed the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he tested positive for alcohol on the breath machine. However, the officer felt he was impaired by a chemical and / or controlled substance.
Defense: Parks & Braxton were ready for trial. The State would have been unable to prove by what "specific" chemical and / or controlled substance the officer thought was allegedly impairing the defendant as required by Florida Law.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Mar 28, 2014 Case: 6153-XDX Judge Ortiz
Facts: The defendant was the at fault driver in a crash which was witnessed by a police officer. When the officer came into contact with the defendant, the officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, slow speech, and a noticeable sway. The defendant admitted to consuming three whiskeys with sprite. He then failed the roadside tests according to the officer and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .114 and .115 in the breath machine.
Defense: Parks & Braxton had numerous discussions with the State prior to setting a trial date.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Mar 28, 2014 Case: 6153-XDX Judge Ortiz
Facts: The defendant was the at fault driver in a crash which was witnessed by a police officer. When the officer came into contact with the defendant, the officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, watery eyes, slow speech, and a noticeable sway. The defendant admitted to consuming three whiskeys with sprite. He then failed the roadside tests according to the officer and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .114 and .115 in the breath machine.
Defense: Parks & Braxton had numerous discussions with the State prior to setting a trial date.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Mar 25, 2014 Case: 13-CT-504589 Judge Gagliardi
Facts: The defendant was stopped for driving without headlights.. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, flushed face, watery eyes, and she admitted to consuming three beers. According the officer, she did not perform well on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. There was no video tape at the scene. After her arrest, she refused the breath test.
Defense: Parks & Braxton had pre-trial negotiations with the prosecutor about the case prior to trial.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Mar 25, 2014 Case: 12-006021MM10A Judge Murphy
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and a flushed face. The defendant performed the roadside tests at the request of the officer. For example, on the one leg stand exercise, he put his foot down three times, swayed, and raised his arms for balance. On the walk and turn test, he stepped off the line and did not touch heel to toe. At the scene of the incident, the defendant allegedly told the officer that "he was to drunk to drive." The defendant was then arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
Defense: The defense that the firm put forth was based upon the fact that just because an officer says something took place, doesn't always mean it is the truth. Based on the numerous contradictions between the officer's version of the facts and the defendant's side of the story, Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. The day before jury trial, the State agreed to Drop the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Mar 25, 2014 Case: 2013-CT-006384 Judge Fegers
Facts: The defendant was stopped on his motorcycle because the officer could not read his tag. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, flushed face, and also found a "mostly" empty bottle of vodka between the cables by the headlight and handle bar. The defendant stated he had drank a "few". The defendant refused to perform the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI. This, however, was the first time the firm represented this client.
Defense: Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State in pre-trial discussions that there was a lack of evidence indicating that the defendant's "normal faculties were impaired."
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Mar 25, 2014 Case: 12-006021MM10A Judge Murphy
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and a flushed face. The defendant performed the roadside tests at the request of the officer. For example, on the one leg stand exercise, he put his foot down three times, swayed, and raised his arms for balance. On the walk and turn test, he stepped off the line and did not touch heel to toe. At the scene of the incident, the defendant allegedly told the officer that "he was to drunk to drive." The defendant was then arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
Defense: The defense that the firm put forth was based upon the fact that just because an officer says something took place, doesn't always mean it is the truth. Based on the numerous contradictions between the officer's version of the facts and the defendant's side of the story, Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. The day before jury trial, the State agreed to Drop the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Mar 25, 2014 Case: 2013-CT-006384 Judge Fegers
Facts: The defendant was stopped on his motorcycle because the officer could not read his tag. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, flushed face, and also found a "mostly" empty bottle of vodka between the cables by the headlight and handle bar. The defendant stated he had drank a "few". The defendant refused to perform the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI. This, however, was the first time the firm represented this client.
Defense: Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State in pre-trial discussions that there was a lack of evidence indicating that the defendant's "normal faculties were impaired."
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Mar 25, 2014 Case: 13-CT-504589 Judge Gagliardi
Facts: The defendant was stopped for driving without headlights.. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, flushed face, watery eyes, and she admitted to consuming three beers. According the officer, she did not perform well on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. There was no video tape at the scene. After her arrest, she refused the breath test.
Defense: Parks & Braxton had pre-trial negotiations with the prosecutor about the case prior to trial.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Mar 21, 2014 Case: 05-2013-CT-063862-AXXX-XX Judge Babb
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding. He was traveling 90 mph in a 45 mph zone. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, extremely slurred speech, blood-shot eyes, and he admitted to drinking beer. The defendant also used the driver's door for balance while stepping out of the car. He then performed the field sobriety tests on videotape. According to the officer, he failed them and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .152 and .165 in the breath machine.
Defense: Parks & Braxton filed a pre-trial motion to suppress the breath test results. In our motion, we alleged, that on videotape at the breath alcohol testing facility, the officer misinformed the defendant as to the law in an attempt to get him to take a breath test. Thus, we argued that he was coerced into taking the test based on the misstatements by the officer. Prior to the motion being argued, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Mar 21, 2014 Case: 05-2013-CT-063862-AXXX-XX Judge Babb
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding. He was traveling 90 mph in a 45 mph zone. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, extremely slurred speech, blood-shot eyes, and he admitted to drinking beer. The defendant also used the driver's door for balance while stepping out of the car. He then performed the field sobriety tests on videotape. According to the officer, he failed them and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .152 and .165 in the breath machine.
Defense: Parks & Braxton filed a pre-trial motion to suppress the breath test results. In our motion, we alleged, that on videotape at the breath alcohol testing facility, the officer misinformed the defendant as to the law in an attempt to get him to take a breath test. Thus, we argued that he was coerced into taking the test based on the misstatements by the officer. Prior to the motion being argued, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Mar 20, 2014 Case: 6721-XEM Judge Newman
Facts: The defendant was stopped after an anonymous person told the officers that the defendant was driving all over the road. The defendant, for some unknown reason, then pulled behind the officers and they made contact. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and blood-shot eyes. According to the officer, the defendant showed signs of impairment on the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he only blew one breath sample of a .241 and then refused the second breath breath test. The police then called it a refusal to submit to breath testing because they only obtained one breath sample and not two as required.
Defense: Parks & Braxton had pre-trial talks with the State about the case.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Mar 20, 2014 Case: 9855-XEQ Judge Hague
Facts: The police were called after the defendant was observed getting into his car by a security guard who believed the defendant was intoxicated. The officer then observed the defendant swerving and conducted a traffic stop. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, red eyes, and balance issues. According to the officer, he failed the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test.
Defense: Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State that the officer did not write one specific pertaining to the defendant's performance on the field sobriety tests. Thus, the complete performance was unknown.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Mar 20, 2014 Case: CTC-13-2636SSLTWS Judge Salton
Facts: The defendant was stopped for driving off the roadway. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, lethargic and sleepy movements, and slow hand / eye coordination. The defendant admitted to drinking wine. According to the officer, he failed the roadside tests which were video taped and he was arrested for DUI. During an inventory search of the defendant's car, the officer found a few prescription bottles for anti-depressants. After his arrest, he tested positive for alcohol in the breath machine. The officer, however, concluded on his DUI ticket that the defendant was impaired by those controlled substances.
Defense: Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State that although the officer found the controlled substances (ie. the anti-depressants in the car), he never even asked the defendant if he took them that day. Furthermore, the officer never even asked for a urine test. Thus, the State could not prove though any testimony what specific controlled substance was "allegedly impairing" the defendant as required by Florida Law. Also, the video tape of the defendant's roadside tests contradicted the reports about the level of impairment. The State Dropped the DUI and the defendant received No conviction for any crime at all.
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.