Parks & Braxton, PA: Miami DUI Lawyer | Criminal Defense
| Dec 6, 2013 | Case: 6972-XEX | Judge Ortiz |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for weaving. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, a flushed face, and blood-shot eyes. 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 was ready for trial. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Dec 6, 2013 | Case: 6972-XEX | Judge Ortiz |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for weaving. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, a flushed face, and blood-shot eyes. 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 was ready for trial. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Dec 6, 2013 | Case: 13-7894-XBPWS-15 | Judge Wansboro |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for illegally driving through a construction area. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, a flushed face, and blood-shot eyes. According to the officer, she failed the video taped roadside tests and and was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she blew a .08 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton first pointed out to the State that the solutions used during the control tests on the defendant's breath card read higher than her actual breath test results. Thus, we argued it could have easily made her test results appear falsely higher than the legal limit of .08. We also pointed out that on video tape, although the defendant totally messed up the alphabet test, she kept telling the officer that English was not her first language. However, he still had the hand cuffs out in his hand even before she finished. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Dec 5, 2013 | Case: 2013-CT-006492AXXX | Judge Drake |
| Facts: | The defendant was involved in a one car crash whereby she ended up on a median. The officer observed her to have an odor of alcohol, unsteadiness, stagger at times, and slurred speech. She refused to perform the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she refused the breath test. The whole incident was captured on video tape. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton filed pre-trial a motion to suppress all of the defendant's statements to police on video tape which were obtained in violation of her Miranda rights. We also filed a motion to exclude her refusal to perform the field sobriety exercises as she was never advised of any adverse consequences by the officer as required by Florida law. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Dec 5, 2013 | Case: 2013-CM-007527 | Judge Conrad |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for having no tag light and making an improper turn. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, blood-shot eyes, and slurred speech. Fresh vomit was also seen running down the driver's side door. The defendant refused to perform the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State that although there was a working police video camera at the scene , the entire DUI investigation was not taped. There was never any reason provided by the police as to why the investigation was not taped. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Dec 5, 2013 | Case: 2013-CM-007527 | Judge Conrad |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for having no tag light and making an improper turn. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, blood-shot eyes, and slurred speech. Fresh vomit was also seen running down the driver's side door. The defendant refused to perform the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State that although there was a working police video camera at the scene , the entire DUI investigation was not taped. There was never any reason provided by the police as to why the investigation was not taped. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Dec 5, 2013 | Case: 2013-CT-006492AXXX | Judge Drake |
| Facts: | The defendant was involved in a one car crash whereby she ended up on a median. The officer observed her to have an odor of alcohol, unsteadiness, stagger at times, and slurred speech. She refused to perform the field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she refused the breath test. The whole incident was captured on video tape. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton filed pre-trial a motion to suppress all of the defendant's statements to police on video tape which were obtained in violation of her Miranda rights. We also filed a motion to exclude her refusal to perform the field sobriety exercises as she was never advised of any adverse consequences by the officer as required by Florida law. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Dec 3, 2013 | Case: 48-2013-CT-008205--A-O | Judge Ansbro |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for not having an operable tag light, failing to stop at a flashing red signal, and making a wide right turn. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and red eyes. The defendant refused to perform any field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. | |
| Result: | On the morning of jury trial, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Dec 3, 2013 | Case: 48-2013-CT-008205--A-O | Judge Ansbro |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped for not having an operable tag light, failing to stop at a flashing red signal, and making a wide right turn. The officer noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and red eyes. The defendant refused to perform any field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Second DUI. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. | |
| Result: | On the morning of jury trial, the State Dropped the DUI. | |
| Nov 20, 2013 | Case: CT-2481-XBP | Judge Dominguez |
| Facts: | The defendant was the at fault driver in a high speed crash. When the officers arrived, they noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, a flushed face, and blood-shot eyes. The officers also noticed that the defendant was lethargic in his movements and was swaying. The defendant refused the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test. The entire investigation was captured on video tape. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State that the officers' observations alleged in their reports were contradicted by the video tape. For example, the defendant was not swaying on tape and his speech was clear. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Nov 20, 2013 | Case: CT-2481-XBP | Judge Dominguez |
| Facts: | The defendant was the at fault driver in a high speed crash. When the officers arrived, they noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, a flushed face, and blood-shot eyes. The officers also noticed that the defendant was lethargic in his movements and was swaying. The defendant refused the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test. The entire investigation was captured on video tape. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton pointed out to the State that the officers' observations alleged in their reports were contradicted by the video tape. For example, the defendant was not swaying on tape and his speech was clear. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Nov 14, 2013 | Case: 12-019107MM10A | Judge Murphy |
| Facts: | A civilian witness observed the defendant driving recklessly. At one point she stated that the defendant almost crashed into another vehicle. She called 911 and provided a description of the car, the driving pattern as well as all of her personal information. Two officers located the defendant and observed her fail to maintain a single lane one time. The officers subsequently pulled the defendant over. The two officers noticed several signs of impairment and called for a DUI task force officer to conduct the investigation. The DUI officer observed a strong odor of alcohol, a flushed face as well as slurred speech. In addition, the defendant was unsteady on her feet. She kept ranting on video about how she knew the sheriff. She conducted the HGN (eye test), walk and turn and the one leg stand. She performed poorly on all tests and was arrested for DUI. All testing was performed on video. At the breath alcohol testing facility she blew a .218 and .204 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton filed a motion to suppress based on an unlawful seizure. At the motion to suppress, the civilian witness testified in detail concerning the severity of the driving pattern. The witness talked about the near collision as well as the weaving all over the road. Next, one of the stopping officers testified. He stated that while dispatch told him to look out for a reckless driver, they did not describe the driving pattern to the officer with any specificity. In addition, he admitted that since he was not the lead officer, he did not see the defendant fail to maintain a single lane. The motion was granted and all of the evidence was thrown out. | |
| Result: | The DUI was dismissed. | |
| Nov 14, 2013 | Case: 12-019107MM10A | Judge Murphy |
| Facts: | A civilian witness observed the defendant driving recklessly. At one point she stated that the defendant almost crashed into another vehicle. She called 911 and provided a description of the car, the driving pattern as well as all of her personal information. Two officers located the defendant and observed her fail to maintain a single lane one time. The officers subsequently pulled the defendant over. The two officers noticed several signs of impairment and called for a DUI task force officer to conduct the investigation. The DUI officer observed a strong odor of alcohol, a flushed face as well as slurred speech. In addition, the defendant was unsteady on her feet. She kept ranting on video about how she knew the sheriff. She conducted the HGN (eye test), walk and turn and the one leg stand. She performed poorly on all tests and was arrested for DUI. All testing was performed on video. At the breath alcohol testing facility she blew a .218 and .204 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton filed a motion to suppress based on an unlawful seizure. At the motion to suppress, the civilian witness testified in detail concerning the severity of the driving pattern. The witness talked about the near collision as well as the weaving all over the road. Next, one of the stopping officers testified. He stated that while dispatch told him to look out for a reckless driver, they did not describe the driving pattern to the officer with any specificity. In addition, he admitted that since he was not the lead officer, he did not see the defendant fail to maintain a single lane. The motion was granted and all of the evidence was thrown out. | |
| Result: | The DUI was dismissed. | |
| Nov 12, 2013 | Case: 13-CT-505089 | Judge Hayes |
| Facts: | The defendant was seen by the police making numerous traffic turns. The defendant then stopped his car in a driveway and sat there. The officer then activated his his overhead lights for some reason and the defendant exited his car and walked towards the officer. The officer then noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he was staggering. The defendant refused to perform the roadside tasks and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew .198 and .192 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton pointed out the State that the defendant did not commit any traffic infractions and there was no reasonable suspicion of a crime. By the officer turning on his overhead lights, the officer turned the initial encounter into an unlawful seizure. | |
| Result: | The DUI was dismissed. | |
| Nov 12, 2013 | Case: CT-7153-XEP | Judge Conrad |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped after officers saw her back over a curb into a tree in a parking lot. They then observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol and blood-shot eyes. According to the officer, she performed poorly on the video taped roadside tests. She was then arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she blew a .142 and a .148 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton were ready for trial. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Nov 12, 2013 | Case: 13-CT-505089 | Judge Hayes |
| Facts: | The defendant was seen by the police making numerous traffic turns. The defendant then stopped his car in a driveway and sat there. The officer then activated his his overhead lights for some reason and the defendant exited his car and walked towards the officer. The officer then noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and he was staggering. The defendant refused to perform the roadside tasks and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew .198 and .192 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton pointed out the State that the defendant did not commit any traffic infractions and there was no reasonable suspicion of a crime. By the officer turning on his overhead lights, the officer turned the initial encounter into an unlawful seizure. | |
| Result: | The DUI was dismissed. | |
| Nov 12, 2013 | Case: CT-7153-XEP | Judge Conrad |
| Facts: | The defendant was stopped after officers saw her back over a curb into a tree in a parking lot. They then observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol and blood-shot eyes. According to the officer, she performed poorly on the video taped roadside tests. She was then arrested for DUI. After her arrest, she blew a .142 and a .148 in the breath machine. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton were ready for trial. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Nov 7, 2013 | Case: 2013-CT-021052AXXX | Judge Sheperd |
| Facts: | He also swayed wile outside the car. The defendant refused to perform any roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton were ready for trial. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Nov 7, 2013 | Case: 2013-CT-021052AXXX | Judge Sheperd |
| Facts: | He also swayed wile outside the car. The defendant refused to perform any roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test. | |
| Defense: | Parks & Braxton were ready for trial. | |
| Result: | The State dropped the DUI. | |
| Nov 5, 2013 | Case: 3873-XEX (JURY TRIAL) | Judge Newman |
| Facts: | The defendant was found passed out in the driver's seat of his car by police in a parking lot at around 3 a.m.. The keys were in the ignition, the engine was on, and so were the lights to the car. After about thirty seconds to a minute, the officer finally opened the door to awake the defendant after banging on the window numerous times and shaking the car. The officer then noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol. slurred speech, and blood-shot eyes. EMS was also called to check on the defendant's well being. After being cleared by EMS, a DUI officer was called to the scene to conduct roadside tests. The defendant performed the eye test (HGN) and the walk and turn. For example, on the walk and turn, the officer stated he stepped off the line five times, raised his arms for balance, and lost his balance during the instructions. Officers also stated that the defendant was unsteady on his feet and staggered while walking around. He was then arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he refused the breath test. This was the defendant's second DUI within a five year period. | |
| Defense: | At Jury Trial, Parks and Braxton argued that the State could not prove the defendant had the "capability" of operating a motor vehicle while sleeping. Thus, we argued he could not have been in actual physical control of the car. Also, we were able to impeach every officer as each one of them did not write several important details or specifics pertaining to the DUI investigation in their reports. | |
| Result: | The Jury found the defendant NOT GUILTY. | |
