Call for a Free Consultation
(800) 625-5232


200XXT0XXX427AXX NO CONVICTION AS CHARGED

The Facts

Case #: 200XXT0XXX427AXX NO CONVICTION AS CHARGED

Charges

The Results

The Defendant was driving his car when he rear ended another vehicle. The victim\'s friend arrived who said the defendant was stumbling about in front of his vehicle. Both cars were totaled. The Defendant was helped into his car by the victim\'s friend while they were waiting for the medics and police to arrive. The witness saw four or five brown pill bottles spread all over the passenger seat and floor. The Defendant was asleep when the officer arrived and had to be woken up. The officer questioned the Defendant about whether he took any medications when the Defendant responded that he was under the care of a pain management doctor and takes oxycodone and roxycodone. The Firm filed a motion to suppress these statements which was granted because of a 5th amendment violation. The Defendant was slurring his speech and was requested to perform roadside exercises. The officer believed that he performed poorly on the exercises and arrested him for Driving Under the Influence of Controlled Substances. The Defendant was taken to the Breath Alcohol Testing Facility where he gave a breath sample. The results were .000 and .000. The officer then requested a urine sample to which the Defendant agreed on video. The officer then sat in the holding cell with defendant where he was unable to urinate. He was given several cups of water but could give a sample. He was eventually additionally charged with Refusal to Submit to the Physical Urine Testing along with the DUI. The Firm successfully convinced the State Attorney\'s Office that they could not prove the Driving Under the Influence charge and it was dropped. Subsequently, the Firm filed a C4 sworn motion to dismiss the refusal charge arguing that the State Attorney\'s Office could not prove that as well because the Defendant in fact agreed to the urine. Additionallhe State could not exclude the reasonable hypothesis of innocence in that the Defendant was medically unable to give a urine. On the D of the trial, the State dropped all of the charges.