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

Jul 14, 2021 Case: 20-CT-504148 Judge George
Facts: The defendant was the at fault driver when she hit a bus from behind. Officers observed slow/sluggish speech, her movements were slow, and she had watery eyes. The defendant admitted to having taken her prescription medicines. Believing she was impaired by a chemical and/or controlled substance, she was asked to perform field sobriety tests. She was then arrested for DUI. At the station, another officer who is a DRE (drug recognition expert) was called in to perform a DRE exam on her to determine what class of drugs was allegedly impairing her. She also provided a urine sample which later came back from FLDE positive for amphetamines.
Defense: The observations both the arresting officer and the DRE officer made were inconsistent with someone being impaired by amphetamines. In fact, the DRE officer concluded that she was impaired by a CNS Depressant which was not only wrong, but on the opposite spectrum of amphetamines. Someone who is impaired by amphetamines will appear euphoric and excited and not slow and sluggish. In addition, someone who is impaired by amphetamines will not exhibit HGN (the eyes test), nor have equal pupil size, like the defendant did. In addition, when the officer administered the roadside tests, he covered his body worn camera with his forearm and clip board so one could not even see the defendant's performance.
Result: The State Dismissed the DUI a week prior to the trial date.
Jul 12, 2021 Case: 21-CT-000056 Judge Hill
Facts: A call was made by the defendant's girlfriend that he was extremely intoxicated and got in his semi-truck and left the area. When police found him, he was parked in his semi at the entrance to his work. As officers approached the defendant, he was asked to exit the truck. He had extreme difficulty exiting the truck and then the officer noticed an odor of alcohol. They also observed a sway, red eyes, and he stated that he had "too many drinks to be driving." He performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Third DUI.
Defense: Parks & Braxton got depositions granted of the two officers in question. Prior to the depos, in speaking to the officers, it was uncovered that when the officers found the defendant, he was sleeping in the bed of his truck. This information was not written in the police reports and would have never been uncovered if the firm did not attempt to take depos. The state could not prove that the defendant was in actual physical control of the truck.
Result: The State then Dismissed the defendant's third DUI.
Jul 12, 2021 Case: 21-CT-000304 Judge Krause
Facts: The defendant was stopped for drifting and almost striking another car. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant performed various roadside tests such as the estimation of time, one leg stand, and walk and turn. He was then arrested for DUI and later blew a. 098 and a .106 in the breath machine.
Defense: Due to the .02 margin of error in the breath machine, the firm was able to place one of the defendant's breath alcohol results under the legal limit.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jul 12, 2021 Case: 21-CT-000304 Judge Krause
Facts: The defendant was stopped for drifting and almost striking another car. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant performed various roadside tests such as the estimation of time, one leg stand, and walk and turn. He was then arrested for DUI and later blew a. 098 and a .106 in the breath machine.
Defense: Due to the .02 margin of error in the breath machine, the firm was able to place one of the defendant's breath alcohol results under the legal limit.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jul 12, 2021 Case: 21-CT-000056 Judge Hill
Facts: A call was made by the defendant's girlfriend that he was extremely intoxicated and got in his semi-truck and left the area. When police found him, he was parked in his semi at the entrance to his work. As officers approached the defendant, he was asked to exit the truck. He had extreme difficulty exiting the truck and then the officer noticed an odor of alcohol. They also observed a sway, red eyes, and he stated that he had "too many drinks to be driving." He performed poorly on roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test. This was the defendant's Third DUI.
Defense: Parks & Braxton got depositions granted of the two officers in question. Prior to the depos, in speaking to the officers, it was uncovered that when the officers found the defendant, he was sleeping in the bed of his truck. This information was not written in the police reports and would have never been uncovered if the firm did not attempt to take depos. The state could not prove that the defendant was in actual physical control of the truck.
Result: The State then Dismissed the defendant's third DUI.
Jul 9, 2021 Case: 19-00002MU10A Judge Diaz
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/glassy eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant then performed various filed sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After being arrested, the defendant stated “he was supposed to have stayed in tonight had made a mistake." He later refused the breath test.
Defense: Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. Prior to trial, the firm pointed out many inconsistencies between the officer's reports and the DUI video tape. Just prior to jury trial, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jul 9, 2021 Case: 19-00002MU10A Judge Diaz
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer noticed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot/glassy eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant then performed various filed sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After being arrested, the defendant stated “he was supposed to have stayed in tonight had made a mistake." He later refused the breath test.
Defense: Parks & Braxton announced ready for trial. Prior to trial, the firm pointed out many inconsistencies between the officer's reports and the DUI video tape. Just prior to jury trial, the State Dropped the DUI.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jul 8, 2021 Case: 20-CT-010471 Judge Farr
Facts: The defendnat was found in a McDonald's parking lot by police after a concerned citizen called 911 that the defendant appeared to be intocxicated. Upon contact, officers observed an odor of alcohol, droopy/bloodshot eyes, slurred speech and he admitted to having consumed alcohol. Once out of the car, he appeared unsteady. After performing the roadside tests he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense: Due to a lack of specifics by the caller, the police did not corroborate any indicators of impairment prior to seizing the defendant by ordering him our of the car.
Result: State dropped the DUI.
Jul 8, 2021 Case: 21-CT-005341 Judge Moses-Stephens
Facts: The defendant was stopped for weaving from side to side. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slightly slurred speech, and she stated she had drank a few glasses of wine. She exhibited mood swings and sometimes was difficult to understand. After performing various field sobriety tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test.
Defense: There was no reasonable suspicion to believe that she was sick, injured, or impaired when the officer stopped her, since no traffic was affected and the driving pattern did not go on for a long time.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jul 8, 2021 Case: 21-CT-003996 Judge Moses-Stephens
Facts: The defendant was stopped for swerving and almost striking the fog line. The officer observed an odor an alcohol, red/watery eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant stated that he had one drink. The defendant performed various field sobriety tests. For example, on the one leg stand, he put his foot down, used his arms for balance, and swayed. He was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense: Issues were raised as to the lawfulness of the traffic stop due to a lack of particulars.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jul 8, 2021 Case: 20-CT-010471 Judge Farr
Facts: The defendnat was found in a McDonald's parking lot by police after a concerned citizen called 911 that the defendant appeared to be intocxicated. Upon contact, officers observed an odor of alcohol, droopy/bloodshot eyes, slurred speech and he admitted to having consumed alcohol. Once out of the car, he appeared unsteady. After performing the roadside tests he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense: Due to a lack of specifics by the caller, the police did not corroborate any indicators of impairment prior to seizing the defendant by ordering him our of the car.
Result: State dropped the DUI.
Jul 8, 2021 Case: 21-CT-005341 Judge Moses-Stephens
Facts: The defendant was stopped for weaving from side to side. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slightly slurred speech, and she stated she had drank a few glasses of wine. She exhibited mood swings and sometimes was difficult to understand. After performing various field sobriety tests, she was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test.
Defense: There was no reasonable suspicion to believe that she was sick, injured, or impaired when the officer stopped her, since no traffic was affected and the driving pattern did not go on for a long time.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jul 8, 2021 Case: 21-CT-003996 Judge Moses-Stephens
Facts: The defendant was stopped for swerving and almost striking the fog line. The officer observed an odor an alcohol, red/watery eyes, and slurred speech. The defendant stated that he had one drink. The defendant performed various field sobriety tests. For example, on the one leg stand, he put his foot down, used his arms for balance, and swayed. He was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense: Issues were raised as to the lawfulness of the traffic stop due to a lack of particulars.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jul 7, 2021 Case: 20-CT-008396 Judge Jeske
Facts: The defendant was the at fault driver in a crash whereby he enterd an intersetion illegally. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. The defendnat refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense: On tape, the defendant was arrested very fast after refusing the roadside tests. It gave the imrpession that the officer already had made up his mind that he was going to arrest the defendant whether he did the roadsdies or not.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jul 7, 2021 Case: 20-CT-008545 Judge Jeske
Facts: The defendant crashed his car into a median then a building. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he leaned on objects for support. He denied drinking any alcohol. After performing roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense: The officer made it out in his reports like the defendant was a falling down drunk. Almost all of his observations that were written were contradicted by the video.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jul 7, 2021 Case: 21-CT-011446 Judge Gutman
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol and bloodshot eyes. She then refused to perform all roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test.
Defense: In order to conduct a DUI investigation, the officer must be indicia of impairment. Here there was none, as she exhibited no erratic drving, no speech issues, and no balance issues. Thus, were was a lack of reasonable suspicion to even conduct a DUI investigation.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jul 7, 2021 Case: 21-CT-003970 Judge Gutman
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding and drfiting. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, watery/bloodshot eyes, and she admitted to having drank two alcoholic beverages. She then performed various field sobriety tests and was subsequently arrested for DUI. She later blew a .124 and a .116 in the breath machine.
Defense: When the officer did the HGN (eyes test), he did not get an angle onset of 45 degrees or less in the defendant's eyes. Under Tharpe's Formula, if that occurs, it may mean that the defendant was under the .08 legal limit.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jul 7, 2021 Case: 20-CT-008396 Judge Jeske
Facts: The defendant was the at fault driver in a crash whereby he enterd an intersetion illegally. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. The defendnat refused to perform roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense: On tape, the defendant was arrested very fast after refusing the roadside tests. It gave the imrpession that the officer already had made up his mind that he was going to arrest the defendant whether he did the roadsdies or not.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jul 7, 2021 Case: 20-CT-008545 Judge Jeske
Facts: The defendant crashed his car into a median then a building. Officers observed an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and he leaned on objects for support. He denied drinking any alcohol. After performing roadside tests, he was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense: The officer made it out in his reports like the defendant was a falling down drunk. Almost all of his observations that were written were contradicted by the video.
Result: The State dropped the DUI.
Jul 7, 2021 Case: 21-CT-011446 Judge Gutman
Facts: The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol and bloodshot eyes. She then refused to perform all roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. She later refused the breath test.
Defense: In order to conduct a DUI investigation, the officer must be indicia of impairment. Here there was none, as she exhibited no erratic drving, no speech issues, and no balance issues. Thus, were was a lack of reasonable suspicion to even conduct a DUI investigation.
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.