Broward – DUI and Refusal to Submit to a Breath Test – Dismissed

Our Client was charged with Driving Under the Influence (DUI), and refusing to submit to a “Lawful” Breath Test.

The officers alleged that their probable cause (legal reason) for stopping our client, was that he ‘failed to obey a traffic control device’ and/or ‘failed to maintain a single lane’.  The arresting officer alleged that after he pulled our client over, he observed signs of impairment, and believed our client to be operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of a chemical or controlled substance, or DUI.

Through research and discovery, our team was able to file a motion to suppress the stop, alleging that the facts presented by the State, through the arresting officer and the Assistant Sate Attorney, were not sufficient to justify the initial stop of our client’s vehicle.

At the hearing on our motion to suppress, the Judge agreed with out position, and granted our Motion to Suppress the Stop.  Once the Stop was determined to be illegal, then all of the evidence gathered by the officer after the illegal stop, is also suppressed, and the Assistant State Attorney no longer has any evidence of impairment, or of a refusal, and ultimately was forced to dismiss the charges against our client.

 

Broward – Felony Possession of a Firearm by a Convicted Felon – Dismissed

Our client, a convicted felon from more than 20 years ago, was accused of being in actual possession of a firearm, and of ammunition.  In the state of Florida, this crime is punishable by a minimum of three (3) years in Florida State Prison.

At the time our client was stopped by the police, he was riding his bicycle with two other bicyclists.  All three bicyclists were stopped by a marked patrol car with its lights flashing.

Through research and discovery, we were able to file a motion to suppress the stop, because we believed that the officer that stopped our client, did not have the required legal justification to do so.

On the morning of the hearing on our Motion to Suppress the Stop, the Assistant State Attorney decided that the evidence we uncovered was so strong in favor of our client, that they decided to dismiss the charges against our client.

 

Broward – Felony Possession of Alprazolam and Marijuana – Dismissed

Our client was was pulled over for allegedly having a non-working tag light.  After being pulled over, the police officers on the scene allegedly smelled the odor of cannabis, and as a result searched the vehicle.  the search of the vehicle allegedly uncovered a pill bottle containing several pills.  After allegedly finding the pills, the police officers allegedly read our client his Miranda warnings (his rights), and allegedly after agreeing to continue speaking with police, our client allegedly admitted that the pills were his.  Besides our client, the driver, there was a passenger who was also arrested and charged with the same crimes.

Strangely, resulting from the same arrest, the arrest affidavits for both our client, and the passenger were inconsistent.  Based on these inconsistencies, and our research, we were able to discover several other inconsistencies, including the location the pills were found, who found the pills, how many pills there were, when statements were made, and who made the statements.

Based on these discoveries, we were able to file a Motion to suppress the statements allegedly made by our client.

During the hearing on our Motion to Suppress the Statements, we were able to show the Judge all of the inconsistencies, and based upon the facts presented, the Judge found that the officers were not credible, and granted our Motion to Suppress the Statements.

Once the Statements were suppressed, the State was unable to establish that our client was in possession of the illegal drugs, and the charges were ultimately dismissed.

 

Broward – DUI – Second within Five Years – Double Refusal – Charge Reduced to Deckless Driving

In the State of Florida, the law mandates certain minimum penalties for certain crimes.  Minimum DUI Penalties

Our Client was pulled over for speeding and for having an expired tag.  When the officer activated his red and blue lights, our client was travelling on a busy service road, just a few blocks away from the development where he lived.  As soon as the officer activated his lights and sirens, our client slowed down, and activated his turn signal, however he did not pull off the road until he reached the driveway that lead to his housing development.  The distance between the place where the officer activated his lights and sirens, and the place where our client stopped, was just under 1/8 mile.  While there were other opportunities for our client to pull over, he felt that it would be safer for him, and for the officer, to travel to the place where he decided to stop.

Once stopped, the officer rapidly approached our clients car, with his gun drawn.  When he came into contact with our client, the officer immediately reprimanded our client for not stopping when he was told to, and demanded our client’s license and registration.  The officer immediately returned to his police car and called in that he was conducting a DUI/DWI investigation.

The officer ultimately arrested our client for DUI/DWI.

When we received all of the discovery in the case, which was essentially a video of the entire encounter, from the moment the officer’s lights and sirens were activated, to the moment that our client was delivered to the jail.  This video, as you could imagine told the whole story.  We were able to use the video to show the prosecutor that all of the alleged observations the officer made, that were allegedly signs of impairment, would have been impossible for him to have made, when he allegedly made them.

We were able to highlight the fact that in total, before the officer decided to conduct a DUI/DWI investigation, only 13 seconds with our client.  We were able to highlight the fact that, the observations he allegedly made (bloodshot, glassy eyes, and a flushed face) were made at a time that our client was wearing a baseball cap, and the officer was standing with his head much higher than our clients face, and that because of the hat he was wearing, it would have been impossible for the officer to have legitimately made those observations.

Pointing out these, along with a handful of other, potential issues with the State’s evidence, led the prosecutor to offer the reduced charge of reckless driving, which does not carry any of the minimum mandatory penalties that a Second DUI/DWI within 5 years carries.  We were successfully able to save our client from spending even a second more time in jail than he did when he was originally arrested, and we were able to save our client from losing his driver’s license for a minimum of 5 years.

While we felt we had a strong case to present to a jury, our client felt more comfortable accepting the reduced charge, knowing that he would be guaranteed to not go to jail, and lose his license.