Apr 23, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-001500	Judge Hanser
Facts:	Officers were called to a parking garage where the defendant's vehicle was causing a disturbance by "drifting." Officers stopped the vehicle and noticed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and red eyes. He was sweating profusely, uneasy on his feet, and belligerent. The defendant had a Cold & Frosty 6-pack of beer in his vehicle. The defendant refused to perform field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	In order to stop a vehicle, there must be probable cause to believe an infraction occurred or reasonable suspicion of a crime. Here, the officer lacked both and the State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 22, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-012045	Judge Koenig
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for straddling the lane markers. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glossy/watery eyes. The defendant had poor dexterity, swayed, and admitted to drinking beer. After performing the field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI.
Defense:	During the HGN (eye test), an angle of onset in the defendant's eyes was not observed prior to 45 degrees. Under Tharpes formula, this would indicate that the defendant had a breath alcohol level under the legal limit at the "time of driving."
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 22, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-056456	Judge Koenig
Facts:	The officer was on foot patrol and noticed the defendant in the parking lot of a bar having difficulty walking in a straight line holding a key in his hand. The defendant tried to conceal himself then ducked behind a fence. The officer observed the defendant open the driver’s door and sit in the driver's seat. The officer then made contact and observed an odor of alcohol, mumbling speech, and glassy eyes. According to the officer, he performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .215 and a .210 in the breath machine.
Defense:	An officer must have reasonable suspicion of a crime in order to lawfully detain a person. Here, there were legally insufficient specific articulable facts justifying the officer to detain the defendant as he initially sat down in his seat.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 22, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-012045	Judge Koenig
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for straddling the lane markers. The officer observed the defendant to have an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glossy/watery eyes. The defendant had poor dexterity, swayed, and admitted to drinking beer. After performing the field sobriety tests, he was arrested for DUI.
Defense:	During the HGN (eye test), an angle of onset in the defendant's eyes was not observed prior to 45 degrees. Under Tharpes formula, this would indicate that the defendant had a breath alcohol level under the legal limit at the "time of driving."
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 22, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-056456	Judge Koenig
Facts:	The officer was on foot patrol and noticed the defendant in the parking lot of a bar having difficulty walking in a straight line holding a key in his hand. The defendant tried to conceal himself then ducked behind a fence. The officer observed the defendant open the driver’s door and sit in the driver's seat. The officer then made contact and observed an odor of alcohol, mumbling speech, and glassy eyes. According to the officer, he performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .215 and a .210 in the breath machine.
Defense:	An officer must have reasonable suspicion of a crime in order to lawfully detain a person. Here, there were legally insufficient specific articulable facts justifying the officer to detain the defendant as he initially sat down in his seat.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 18, 2019	Case: A9EVGYE	Judge Riba
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol and bloodshot eyes. He also had slurred speech, a flushed face, and fumbled with his documents. He was unsteady, swayed, and staggered while outside the car. The defendant refused to perform all of the roadside tasks other than HGN (eye test), and was then arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The video contradicted the police reports and this was brought to the State's attention by the firm. On tape, the defendant's speech was normal and he was not off balance or unsteady. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 18, 2019	Case: A9EVGYE	Judge Riba
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. The officer observed an odor of alcohol and bloodshot eyes. He also had slurred speech, a flushed face, and fumbled with his documents. He was unsteady, swayed, and staggered while outside the car. The defendant refused to perform all of the roadside tasks other than HGN (eye test), and was then arrested for DUI. He later refused the breath test.
Defense:	The video contradicted the police reports and this was brought to the State's attention by the firm. On tape, the defendant's speech was normal and he was not off balance or unsteady. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 16, 2019	Case: 2017-CT-012171	Judge Hanser
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving all over the road and driving into oncoming traffic. The defendant had slow/slurred speech, slow movements, and stumbled a few times. The officer did not smell an odor of alcohol, however, the defendant stated that he had taken Methadone earlier in the day. The defendant performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. Believing that the defendant was impaired by drugs, he was asked for a urine test to which he refused. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
Defense:	Prior to trial, the firm took pretrial depositions of the arresting officer and the State's expert toxicologist. After questioning the two witnesses, the defense established that neither could give an opinion that the defendant was actually impaired by the Methadone. Under Florida law, the State cannot just prove a person is just impaired, it has to be by either alcohol, and/or "specific" chemical and/or "specific" controlled substance. The State Dropped the defendant's Second DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 16, 2019	Case: 2017-CT-012171	Judge Hanser
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for driving all over the road and driving into oncoming traffic. The defendant had slow/slurred speech, slow movements, and stumbled a few times. The officer did not smell an odor of alcohol, however, the defendant stated that he had taken Methadone earlier in the day. The defendant performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. Believing that the defendant was impaired by drugs, he was asked for a urine test to which he refused. This was the defendant's Second DUI.
Defense:	Prior to trial, the firm took pretrial depositions of the arresting officer and the State's expert toxicologist. After questioning the two witnesses, the defense established that neither could give an opinion that the defendant was actually impaired by the Methadone. Under Florida law, the State cannot just prove a person is just impaired, it has to be by either alcohol, and/or "specific" chemical and/or "specific" controlled substance. The State Dropped the defendant's Second DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 15, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-015534	Judge Koenig
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving. Upon contact, the officer observed an odor of alcohol, a flushed face, and bloodshot eyes. The defendant admitted to having consumed numerous vodkas. He swayed while he stood and performed poorly on the roadside tests. He was arrested for DUI and subsequently blew a .123 and a .116 in the breath machine.
Defense:	Many of the observations written by the officer in his reports were contradicted by the video tape. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 15, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-015534	Judge Koenig
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for weaving. Upon contact, the officer observed an odor of alcohol, a flushed face, and bloodshot eyes. The defendant admitted to having consumed numerous vodkas. He swayed while he stood and performed poorly on the roadside tests. He was arrested for DUI and subsequently blew a .123 and a .116 in the breath machine.
Defense:	Many of the observations written by the officer in his reports were contradicted by the video tape. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 11, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-011341	Judge Jacobus
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding and a broken license plate light. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot/glassy eyes. The defendant admitted to having come from a bar where he had drank 2-3 drinks. After performing the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand exercises, he was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .157 and a .149 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The video contradicted the breath results. In otherwise, his performance on the field sobriety tests clearly showed that his breath alcohol results may have been under the legal limit at the time of driving. It is the theory of absorption and elimination of alcohol through the body.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 11, 2019	Case: 2019-CT-011341	Judge Jacobus
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding and a broken license plate light. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot/glassy eyes. The defendant admitted to having come from a bar where he had drank 2-3 drinks. After performing the HGN (eye test), walk and turn, and one leg stand exercises, he was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .157 and a .149 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The video contradicted the breath results. In otherwise, his performance on the field sobriety tests clearly showed that his breath alcohol results may have been under the legal limit at the time of driving. It is the theory of absorption and elimination of alcohol through the body.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 10, 2019	Case: 0250-XEY	Judge Barket
Facts:	The defendant was detained by police after he left the scene of an accident for which he was at fault. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and lethargic movements. He needed to use the car for balance and support, and he also swayed. He performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .167 and a .162 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The State could not prove that the defendant was the driver at the time of crash as he was outside the car walking around when police arrived. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 10, 2019	Case: 0250-XEY	Judge Barket
Facts:	The defendant was detained by police after he left the scene of an accident for which he was at fault. Officers noticed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and lethargic movements. He needed to use the car for balance and support, and he also swayed. He performed poorly on the roadside tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .167 and a .162 in the breath machine.
Defense:	The State could not prove that the defendant was the driver at the time of crash as he was outside the car walking around when police arrived. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 9, 2019	Case: 2018-CT-015641	Judge Gutman
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding and failing to maintain a single lane. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glassy/watery eyes. He had a wristband on from a bar and also had lethargic movements. The defendant stated he had a few drinks and then performed field sobriety tests, which were not video taped. He was arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	Since there was no video, it was pointed out to the State by the firm that the officer did not write any specifics as it related to the roadside tasks. Also, the trooper never even made any attempts to call for a patrol car with a dash camera. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 9, 2019	Case: 18-CT-504774	Judge Gonzalez
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding. He had an odor of alcohol, mumbled/slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes. He stated he had consumed three beers, appeared sleepy, and also had a flushed face. He performed poorly on field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. After his arrest, he blew a .132 and a .128 in the breath machine.
Defense:	If evidence is destroyed and it is exculpatory, meaning favorable to the defendant, then the State must be penalized. In this case, although requested several times by the firm, the State nor the police ever turned over the roadside video. It turned out through a computer glitch, it never got uploaded properly. Since the defendant claimed he did better on the roadside tests than the officer wrote, the only evidence to support his claim was that tape. Prior to the firm filing any motions to dismiss for destruction of evidence, the State Dropped the DUI and the defendant received No criminal conviction.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.

Apr 9, 2019	Case: 2018-CT-015641	Judge Gutman
Facts:	The defendant was stopped for speeding and failing to maintain a single lane. The officer observed an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glassy/watery eyes. He had a wristband on from a bar and also had lethargic movements. The defendant stated he had a few drinks and then performed field sobriety tests, which were not video taped. He was arrested for DUI and later refused the breath test.
Defense:	Since there was no video, it was pointed out to the State by the firm that the officer did not write any specifics as it related to the roadside tasks. Also, the trooper never even made any attempts to call for a patrol car with a dash camera. The State Dropped the DUI.
Result:	The State dropped the DUI.