The Defendant was seen traveling at a high rate of speed. The Deputy activated his radar and locked in a speed of 63 in a 45 mph zone. The Defendant was also seen drifting across traffic lane lines. As the Defendant came to the intersection of Providence Rd and Providence Lake Blvd, his vehicle ran the red light. At this point, the Deputy activated his emergency equipment and initiated a stop of the Defendant. The vehicle was slow to respond to the activated lights on the deputy’s car, but after pulling over, the Deputy made contact with the Defendant. The Defendant was slow and fumbled with is paperwork, at one point, dropping his license out the driver’s door window. The Defendant had slurred speech, the odor of alcohol on his breath and bloodshot eyes. The Defendant was read his Miranda rights and then interviewed. The Defendant admitted to being out with friends at a couple of bars. The Defendant then told the Deputy that he would not have driven if not for his friends needing a ride. When asked how impaired he felt on a scale of 1-10 with 10 being the most impaired he has ever been, the Defendant answered between 4-5. The Defendant then stated he knew he should not be driving because of the effects of alcohol he felt. The Deputy then asked the Defendant to perform field sobriety exercises, which he agreed. The exercises showed multiple clues of impairment and the Defendant was placed under arrest for DUI. The Defendant submitted to a breath test after being read the Implied Consent law and the results were .174 and .175. The Defendant was also given tickets for speeding, failing to maintain a single lane and running a red light. Result: State dropped the DUI, failure to maintain a single lane and red light charges.
The Defendant was seen traveling north and continuously drifting on and off of the left lane markers at least 3 times. The Defendant was then observed following another vehicle in front of it too closely, leaving less than a car length in distance between them. The vehicle was stopped and contact was made with the Defendant by the Officer. The officer noted the Defendant had the odor of an alcoholic beverage on her breath, and her eyes were bloodshot and glassy. The Defendant agreed to perform field sobriety exercises. Prior to administering the exercises, the Defendant told the officer she suffered from depression and anxiety problems. During the field sobriety exercises, the Defendant exhibited multiple indicators of impairment. On the walk and turn test, she failed to maintain her balance, started prior to instructions being completed, stopped walking to steady herself, did not touch heel to toe, improperly performed the turn and used her arms for balance. On the One Leg Stand test, she swayed while trying to balance. On the finger to nose test, she failed to touch her nose with the index finger. After the completion of the field sobriety exercises, the Defendant was placed under arrest. She was taken to Central Breath Testing and agreed to provide a breath sample. The results of her breath test were .121 and .103. The firm filed a motion to suppress evidence in the case and set the case for trial. After reviewing the firm’s motion, the State dropped the DUI charge on the morning the motion and trial were set to be heard.
The Defendant was charged with DUI with property damage and leaving the scene of an accident. The Defendant gave a breath sample that was more than twice the legal limit. The Firm quickly set the case for trial and argued to the State Attorney’s office that the owner of the bar the Defendant was at before the arrest had attempted to assault her, and that was reason for her leaving the bar in her condition and her defense to the charges. The DUI with property damage charges were reduced and the leaving the scene charge was dismissed.
An officer from the Hallandale Police Department observed the Defendant make a wide right turn and cause a traffic crash. The Defendant left the scene of that crash and continued to drive. The Officer followed the Defendant in an effort to initiate a traffic stop. The Officer put on his emergency lights and siren and the defendant pulled his vehicle over to the curb. The officer was about to exit his fully marked vehicle when the defendant began to drive again. The Defendant then pulled over again approximately 50-100 feet later. Upon making, contact with the Defendant, Officers noticed the odor of an alcoholic beverage, bloodshot eyes and unsteadiness and slurred and accented speech. The defendant performed roadside sobriety exercises and did so poorly. The Defendant submitted to the breath test which registered .226/.225.g /210L. After the firm took the deposition of the stopping officer, it was able to demonstrate to the State Attorney that the Defendant did not commit the crime of Felony Fleeing and Eluding. All felony charges were dropped by the State.
The Defendant was traveling South on SR7 in the City of Hollywood and was clearly at fault in a rear-end collision that caused over $10,000.00 in damage. Upon making contact with the Defendant, law enforcement officers noticed the Defendant have the odor of an alcoholic beverage, his eyes were red and watery, his speech was extremely slurred and he was extremely unsteady on his feet. The DUI investigator arrived on the scene, made identical observations of the Defendant and administered roadside sobriety exercises. The exercises had to be stopped as the defendant became so unsteady he was on the verge of falling to the ground. The Defendant was arrested and submitted to the breath test, which resulted in a reading of .219/.225 g/210L. After the firm’s investigation into the background of the officers involved, all charges were dismissed by the State.
Client was observed driving at a high rate of speed. He hit a speed bump which cause his truck to leave the ground. When it returned, the tires squealed. He was pulled over for Reckless Driving. The officer noticed he had an odor of alcohol on his breath, bloodshot eyes, and a flushed face. The officer asked our client to perform field sobriety exercises. Are client asked if he would be arrested if he declined. The officer stated she needed a yes or no answer. Our client again asked if he would be arrested if he declined. He was then arrested and taken to jail. At the jail, he refused to provide a breath sample. The firm filed a motion to suppress all evidence because the stop of our client’s vehicle was illegal and there was no probable cause to arrest. The judge agreed with our motion and the State dismissed all charges.
The defendant was the driver of a vehicle involved in a crash in the parking lot of a liquor store and spontaneously uttered “I drank half a bottle of vodka today while at home” and took (20) 10 mg. pills valium and later stated she took 50 Valium. There were also 2 empty bottles of Smirnoff Vodka in the glovebox. Officers noticed the defendant to have an odor of an alcoholic beverage, bloodshot watery eyes, mumbled and mush mouthed speech and difficulty exiting her vehicle. The defendant was asked to perform roadside sobriety exercises and did so poorly and nearly fell over and needed assistance to walk. The defendant was arrested and submitted to a breath and urine test. The Firm filed a Motion to Discharge based on a Speedy Trial Due Process Violation. The State elected not to file any charges after the filing of the Motion.
Defendant was stopped for erratic driving. Defendant refused roadside sobriety test and was arrested. Defendant refused intoxilizer test. The DUI case was dropped. This was the 3rd DUI case against the defendant.
The defendant was driving north on Jog Road when he made a right turn heading east on Forest Hill Blvd. The officer from Greenacres Police stated that the defendant was driving to the left side of his lane for over 200 feet and not maintaining a single lane. Additionally, the officer testified that he had been following him because of his suspicious driving pattern. The officer pulled the defendant over for his driving pattern and smelled an odor of alcohol coming from the defendant, bloodshot and glassy eyes as well as slurred speech. The defendant was asked to step out of the car to perform roadside sobriety tasks which were all captured on video. The defendant performed poorly on the tasks and was arrested for Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol. He was taken to the Breath Facility where he was asked to submit to a breath test. The Defendant refused to submit after being read implied consent. The Firm filed a motion to suppress the defendant’s identification all evidence that flowed from the stop due to the fact that the officer did not have reasonable suspicion of DUI based upon the videotaped driving pattern. The court heard testimony from the officer, watched the video and then agreed with the Firm and granted the motion. The State dismissed the DUI.
The Defendant was seen by a Deputy accelerating away from a red light as it cycled to green at a high rate of speed. The speed was estimated at 65 mph in a 45 mph zone. The Deputy activated his radar unit which confirmed the Defendant’s speed at 65 mph. While traveling behind the vehicle, the Deputy observed it weave over the left land marker with its left side tires. The vehicle then weaved across the lane so that the right side tires had gone across the right lane marker. The vehicle then traveled back across the lane with the left side tires again crossing the left lane marker. The Deputy then activated his emergency lights and the vehicle made no reaction. The Deputy, after traveling about 500 yards, then activated his siren to get the vehicle’s attention. The vehicle then came to a stop. When the Deputy made contact with the Defendant, he noticed an odor of an alcoholic beverage on his breath and red-watery eyes. The Deputy asked the Defendant to exit the vehicle and then noticed he had a sway about his person stumbling when he exited. The Deputy requested the Defendant to perform field sobriety exercises, which he agreed. On the Walk and Turn test, the Defendant could not keep his balance while listening to instructions, did not touch heel to toe 10 times, stepped off the line 6 times, used his arms for balance and lost his balance during the turn. On the One Leg Stand exercise, the Defendant swayed while trying to balance, used his arms for balance, and put his foot down 4 times. The Defendant was placed under arrest for DUI and also issued a speeding ticket. The Defendant provided breath samples of .089 and .090 BAC. After the breath test, the Defendant became upset and continuously stated “This is bullshXX” whenever asked any questions. Results: The case was set for trial by the firm. Before the trial date, the State dropped the DUI charge.
The defendant crashed in to the rear of a stopped tow truck at a high rate of speed. The defendant made several statements to the first responding officer that he was the driver involved in the crash and made several statements regarding how much alcohol he had consumed. That deputy noticed the defendant to be unsteady on his feet and the odor of an alcoholic beverage on his breath covered by a breath mint. The defendant also had slurred speech; difficulty coherently answering questions; and a flushed face and bloodshot watery eyes. The defendant refused to perform roadside sobriety exercises and refused a blood test. The DUI charges and the criminal Refsual to Submit to Testing were dropped.
The Defendant was seen leaving a nightclub located on Broward Boulevard. The Defendant made an improper left turn onto Broward Boulevard and began to drive westbound in the eastbound lanes of travel. The Defendant was then stopped by an Officer from the Fort Lauderdale Police Department. Upon making contact with the Defendant, the officer noticed the strong odor of an alcoholic beverage, flushed face, bloodshot, glassy eyes and that the defendant was unsteady on his feet upon exiting his vehicle. A BSO DUI Task Force Officer was called to the scene for purposes of a DUI investigation. The DUI Investigator made identical physical observations of the Defendant and administered roadside sobriety exercises. The Defendant performed poorly on the roadside sobriety exercises which were captured on video. The Defendant submitted to the breath test that resulted in readings of .127/.125 g/210L, 50% over the legal limit of .08. The firm argued that the Defendant was not impaired at the time he was driving based on his appearance as was seen on the video and also argued that his driving was due to his unfamiliarity with the area. The Defendant was found not guilty by a jury after only 10 minutes of deliberations and the Court found him not guilty of all infractions of driving the wrong way and improper left turn.
