|
Recent Victories
Case I.
My client was a very likeable, retired telephone installer who was stopped on his way home from a date at a automobile roadblock sobriety checkpoint. The contact officer detected the odor of an alcoholic beverage on the client’s breath and conducted further investigation. Even though the client had an old leg injury, he performed the field sobriety exercises adequately. Nevertheless, the client was arrested. The client was offered a breath test and after numerous attempts to get clarification from the public service aid regarding the consequences of submitting to or declining to take the breath test, the client refused to take the breath test.
The State refused to reduce the charges, so we proceeded to trial. Before I had enough time to collect my belongings and exit the courtroom, the jury returned a verdict after deliberating for all of 3 minutes. Just enough time to elect a foreman and take a vote.
Verdict: NOT GUILTY!
Case II.
My client had been out with her friends socializing and had been consuming alcohol. On her way home she began to feel sick, so she decided to park her car and go to sleep. The police observed her parked car and decided to wake my client. Eventually the police woke my client up. The police reported that she had a flushed face, an odor of alcohol and slurred speech - facts we did not dispute. My client refused to take the breath test.
At trial, we argued to the jury that my client exercised good judgment by deciding to park her car and get some sleep rather than continue to drive once she began not to feel well. The prosecution argued that while my client was not technically "driving," she was nevertheless in "actual physical control" of a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol to the extent that her normal faculties were impaired.
Verdict: NOT GUILTY!
Case III:
After having lunch with some business associates, my client, a single engine airplane pilot, decided to take a shortcut on his way back to his office through Port Everglades. In the aftermath of 9-11, the port had been cordoned off to prevent the free flow of traffic. However, before reaching the exact location of the roadblock, my client turned off on a side street and went around the roadblock.
My client was stopped by Broward County Deputy Sheriffs despite the fact that he had committed no traffic violations. Still, the police detected an odor of an alcoholic beverage, flushed face and slurred speech. My client admitted to having a beer at lunch, but maintained that he was perfectly sober. The client was offered a breath test, which he refused to take - just on principle since the police said even if he blew under the legal limit, he would not be released without first being booked in to the county jail and having to post bond.
Before commencing trial, I submitted a motion to suppress evidence on the grounds that the stop of his motor vehicle was an unlawful seizure in violation of the U.S. and Florida Constitutions since the stop conducted was without any legal justification.
The judge agreed and the Motion to Suppress was GRANTED! Case dismissed.
Case IV:
My client was asleep in his parked car after having consumed alcohol. We agreed that the client was probably under the under the influence of alcohol to the extent that his normal faculties were impaired, but vehemently denied that he was in "actual physical control" of his motor vehicle. The arresting officer, a veteran of the BSO DUI Task Force, testified that the car keys were in the ignition, which could have been sufficient facts for the jury to convict my client. The arresting officer testified that instead of rolling down the electrically operated power window, my client opened the driver’s door so he could to speak to the officer after having been woken up.
During my final argument, I argued to the jury that if the keys were truly in the ignition as the arresting officer claimed, then all my client would have had to do to speak to the officer was simply press the button to open the driver’s side power window. Additionally, if the keys were really in the ignition as the arresting officer maintained, when my client opened the car door the deputy sheriff’s carcam audio feature would have recorded the "ding, ding, ding" of door chime alerting him not to forget his keys.
Verdict: NOT GUILTY!
Case V:
Client was on his way home from running an errand when he was stopped at a roadblock sobriety checkpoint. The officer detected the odor of alcohol, flushed face and slurred speech. The client was asked to perform field sobriety exercises, which the police claimed indicated impairment and subsequently arrested the client. The client was then video taped performing the field sobriety exercises a second time. A breath test was conducted with a .136 g/dl result.
At the jury trial, I was able to discredit the reliability of the breath testing equipment on cross-examination of the State’s so-called breath "expert" by demonstrating that the good science the breath testing equipment was based upon was being completely misapplied. It also helped that my client, a computer software company executive, performed the field sobriety exercises flawlessly and that his speech was clearly not slurred, contradicting police testimony.
Verdict: NOT GUILTY!
|
