The client was involved in a domestic dispute with his wife that became physical.  Both the wife and the client were charged with battery. The firm was hired for the case and immediately contacted the state attorneys office to inform them that because there was no clear aggressor in the case that both defendants could claim self defense. The state agreed and dismissed both our client’s case and the his wife’s case.

The client was stopped for expired tag by law enforcement.  Once stopped the officer noticed the client seemed impaired by alcohol and asked the client to perform field sobriety exercises. The client performed poorly and as a result was arrested for DUI and taken to jail. At the jail the client provided a breath sample nearly twice the legal limit.  The firm was hired for the case and it began negotiating with the state attorney’s office. It was argued by the firm that the client was extremely cooperative in the case, the client had no previous criminal charges, and that there was no dangerous driving pattern. The State agreed and dismissed the DUI.

Our client was arrested and charged with DUI involving a crash. He provided a breath sample at the time of his arrest and was over the legal limit. He came to us looking for a way to defend his case as he did not believe he was DUI at the time he was driving. We came up with a plan to show the jury that he under the legal limit at the time of driving. We retained an expert witness who reviewed the case and agreed with our theory. The expert drafted a report and we proceeded to set the case for trial. We proceeded to a pre-trial hearing and announced that we were ready for trial. On the day of trial, the State dropped the DUI charge.

Our client allegedly ran his car into a light pole and multiple mailboxes. When officers arrived, our client was in the driver’s seat. However, they neglected to check with witnesses who said that several people fled the scene after the crash. None of the witnesses identified our client as the driver. Further, no consideration was taken into the fact that our client likely suffered a concussion after the crash. He was arrested and charged with DUI, with Property Damage. These issues were presenteed to the prosecutor.  Ticket Clinic lawyers pushed for a jury trial.  Eventually the prosecutor agreed to drop the DUI.

While conducting proactive patrol, two law enforcement officers observed a vehicle traveling approximately 40 mph over the speed limit. While stopped with the vehicle at a red light, law enforcement ran the tag, and identified the driver as the registered owner through the open windows. When the light turned green, the vehicle burned out, and sped away at a high rate of speed (approximately 45 mph over the speed limit). Law enforcement activated their lights and sirens, and the vehicle sped away at an even high rate of speed. A warrant was issued for our client, the driver of the vehicle observed charging our client with Fleeing/Attempting to Elude Law Enforcement – a felony that carries a mandatory felony conviction on someone’s record, as well as a mandatory Driver’s License suspension upon conviction. After receiving the case, our attorneys went to work reviewing the evidence. Of particular importance was the Body Worn Camera that was provided by the State. This video created more questions than it did give answers as to what actually happened. Based on the questions created by the State’s own evdience, our attorneys were successfully able to negotiate this case to resolve to a misdemeanor offense, sparing our client from becoming a convicted felon and avoiding a license suspension.

The client was arrested by the Indian River County Sheriffs office after allegedly almost striking a Deputy during a road stop. Upon contact, they found an open beer and our client admitted to drinking 6 beers in the course of the night. However, the officers did take into account it was over a 12 hour day, not just a short night. In addition, they failed to get a Spanish translator. Despite the language barrier, we argued that our client actually passed the field sobriety tests based on his performance. Coupled with video, we argued our client was not impaired, and the officers rushed the investigation.  The State agreed and reduced the DUI to a wet-reckless.

Our client was charged with Racing and driving 50 mph over the speed limit. The Trooper observed two vehicles in her rear-view mirror approaching at a high rate of speed. Both vehicles were side by side, with the vehicle on the left just slightly ahead. She clocked one of the vehicles at 123 mph and she observed the vehicles staying side by side as they passed her. We closed his case with only a careless driving, minimum fine, a driving school, no suspension and no points on his license. The 50 over speeding ticket was dismissed.

Our client was charged with DUI and Refusal to Submit to a Breath Test. An Officer responded to a noise complaint in an apartment complex parking lot. He observed a group of males standing next to the vehicle and he ordered them to turn down the music. Our client sat in the driver’s seat and turned down the music. The officer told him to keep the music down and not to drive because he smelled the odor of an alcoholic beverage coming from his breath. The officer realized that he only spoke Spanish and used a translation app to repeat the warning. Several minutes later the officer observed our client in the same vehicle drive pass him, while playing loud music. He watched him park and walked up to him. The music was still playing loud as he exited the driver seat. After the officer observed him staggering and swaying, he detained him and requested that he perform Field Sobriety Exercises. Our client walked away and was placed under arrest for DUI. He refused the breath test. The State initially offered him pretrial diversion but we advised to wait and allow the attorney to do a full review of the case.  After working the case and speaking to the prosecutor on multiple occasions, the charges were dismissed.

Our client was charged with Racing and driving 123 mph in a 70 mph zone. The roadway was wet and heavy traffic due to Christmas holidays. The Trooper was in the far right lane. She observed two vehicles in her rear view mirror approaching at a high rate of speed. Both vehicles were side by side, with the left vehicle just slightly ahead. She visually estimated the vehicles at 120 mph and she used radar to obtain a target reading of 123 mph. The vehicles stayed side by side as they passed her. On the in car video, you can see her jerking her car to the right to avoid a rear end collision from the right vehicle. The State amended the criminal charge to a careless driving and we closed his case with a minimum fine, a driving school, no suspension and no points on his license.

The Client was involved in a serious vehicle accident when she went the wrong direction on an interstate exit ramp.  Law enforcement was called to the scene where they discovered that not only was the Client injured but she also smelled of alcohol.  She was transported to the hospital for treatment.  Once at the hospital, law enforcement determined that the Client would be in the hospital for quite some time and as a result a blood sample was requested in order to determine the Client’s blood alcohol level.  The Client initially refused but later recanted the refusal.  The Client was then charged with DUI.   The Firm was hired to represent the Client and began gathering all the relevant evidence.  There was no video of the incident or of law enforcement’s interaction with her, however there was an audio recording.  On said audio recording the Client’s speech pattern sounded extremely slurred and impaired.  The Firm set the case for trial based on the fact that the State had limited evidence, other than the audio recording.  The State agreed that the case was weak and dismissed the DUI charge.

Client southbound on Hwy 301 when school bus crossed in front of her and she collided with side of bus between rear wheels and back bumper.The front seat passenger in Ms. Griffis’ car was killed. She was alleged to have been speeding by FHP and given a ticket for violation of a TCD causing a Fatality. She was facing a 6 month DL suspension and minimum $1000 fine. At trial, we argued bus was at fault for accident and that Ms Griffis should have been cited for speeding and not TCD since law requires a specific statute to be used if applicable rather than a general statute like TCD. Judge found her Not Guilty.

The Client was stopped for speeding and once stopped Officers smelled an odor of alcohol and believed the Client to be impaired.  A DUI investigation was conducted and the Client performed poorly on the field sobriety exercises.  The Client was arrested for DUI for the second time and subsequently gave a breath sample that was barely over the legal limit.  The Firm was hired to investigate the case and discovered that not only was the Client’s breath sample just above a .08, but the breath machine used was found to be giving results that were not accurate.  As a result the case was set for trial.  The day before the trial the State agreed to dismiss the DUI charge.