Source: https://www.felonyflorida.com/dui-dwi-case-results-part-4.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 17:19:08+00:00

Document:
Process: Mr. Foley filed a Motion to Suppress based on lack of reasonable suspicion to detain the defendant for DUI and lack of probable cause to arrest the defendant. Additionally, Mr. Foley filed a motion to strike the accident investigating officer which was granted. Soon thereafter, the state stipulated to the motion and dropped the charges.
Process: Case was prepared for trial and Mr. Foley was looking forward to destroying the police officers on the stand. A supervisor intervened and offered a reduced charge. It was the clients choice to accept the withhold of adjudication on the reduced charge.
Unsteady on his feet(defendant kept falling over) , glassy/bloodshot eyes and an odor of an alcoholic beverage.
Facts: On 9/7 at 20:20, the defendant was south on a road and approaching a red light. The defendant crashed into the rear of a grey car, which was pushed into a grey Infinity. Officer M responded to investigate the crash. During his contact with the defendant, Officer M made observations consistent with the defendant begin impaired by alcohol and requested a DUI investigation.
Officer B arrived at 2050 and contacted the witness. The witness provided a video taped statement. The witness stated that he observed the defendant south on a road. The defendant had cut off the witness. The witness further stated that the defendant crashed into the rear of his car several times before stopping. The witness contacted the defendant in the driver seat of his running vehicle and the defendant was disoriented and had to be told to shut his car off. The witness also did point out the defendant as the driver of the vehicle.
Officer B asked the defendant to submit to roadside exercises. The defendant refused and made several unsolicited statements that he had 3 drinks and that he could not do the exercises if he was sober. Officer B did advise the defendant that he would base his decision to make an arrest based on his observation to this point and his refusal would be used as evidence against him.
The defendant did state that he would attempt the exercises. The defendant stated he ahs prostrate cancer and macular degeneration in one eye. HGN was not attempted due to the unknown effects of Macular degeneration on HGN.
The first exercise was HGN. The defendant could not assume the starting position and he began walking too soon. At this point, the defendant refused to continue.
The defendant was arrested and asked to submit to breath testing which he agreed. Officer B transported the defendant and he was given a breath test with results of .158 and .153.
Facts: Trooper V. while on routine patrol was dispatched to a vehicle crash involving two cars at the location. At Trooper V.’s arrival he observed Car One facing east in the right center travel lane with right side and front damage. He also observed Car Two facing west with front damage. He observed a male lying on the roadway with a large amount of blood on his face. He met with defendant who was standing outside of Car Two. As Officer V. spoke with defendant he could smell a strong odor of an alcoholic beverage emitting from his breath and person. The defendant was unsteady on his feet and nearly fell twice. Office V. also noticed the defendant’s red flushed face and watery, bloodshot eyes. Officer V. requested to see the defendant’s driver’s license, registration, and insurance for the vehicle. Defendant gave Officer V. his driver’s license. Officer V. met with a witness who witnessed the traffic crash. Officer V. advised the witness he had concluded his crash investigation and was now conducting a criminal investigation for DUI. The witness stated and wrote a statement advising he observed the defendant behind the wheel in the driver’s seat of Car Two. Officer V. then spoke with the defendant and advised that he was now concluding his crash investigation and was now conducting a criminal investigation for DUI and asked if he understood. Defendant replied with a “yes.” Officer V. then asked the defendant if he would perform voluntary field sobriety exercises and he agreed. Speaking with the defendant, Officer V. could smell a strong odor of an alcoholic beverage emitting from his breath as he spoke. Officer V. observed bloodshot, watery, glassy eyes and a red flushed face on the defendant. Defendant was asked if he had any broken bones (“no”), sick (“no”), diabetic (“no”), epileptic (“no”). The following exercises were demonstrated, performed, and noted.
1. Horizontal gaze nystagmus: Equal tracking observed in both left and right eyes with equal pupils. Lack of smooth pursuit in both eyes in both left and right eyes. Distinct and sustained nystagmus at maximum deviation observed in both left and right eyes. Defendant followed pen with head and had to be instructed to follow with eyes only several times. Swayed side to side 1-2 inches in circular motion.
2. Walk and turn: Defendant was demonstrated the walk and turn, defendant stated he understood. The defendant started the exercise twice prior to being told to begin. The defendant took eleven steps on the first pass. The defendant stepped off the line on step 3, missed heel-to-toe on all steps more than four inches. On the second pass, defendant took a total of twelve steps. The defendant missed heel-to-toe on all steps more than four inches.
3. One leg stand: defendant lifted his left leg to perform this exercise. Defendant put his foot down on 3 and 6. Defendant started again from zero and dropped his foot again on 3 and 6. Defendant used his arms for balance. Defendant then quit the exercise.
4. Finger to nose: defendant was demonstrated, defendant stated he understood. Defendant was unable to follow instruction with respect to arm movements on several occasions. Left, open eyes prior to touching tip of finger to tip of nose; right, left of nose; right, between lip and nose; right between lip and nose; left between lip and nose; right between lip and nose.
Due to the seriousness of the injuries to the other driver, blood was drawn from the defendant. Paramedic A. collected blood from the defendant’s right arm. The blood was placed into a Tri-Tech blood kit. The first vial was collected at 5:21 AM and the second at 5:22 AM. Officer V. sealed the blood kit and transported it to the Medical Examiners office. About three weeks later, Officer V. received the final toxicology report from the Medical Examiner’s Office with a positive result of Ethanol. The results of the analyses were .238 and .236 grams of alcohol per 100mL of blood. Based on Officer V.’s investigation, observations, witness statement and laboratory evidence, Officer V. is requesting a Capias for a Warrant for the arrest of the defendant for charges of DUI. Cpl. M. video record the voluntary field sobriety exercises performed by the defendant and the blood draw conducted on the defendant. That video was placed into evidence.
Process: Defendant was a teacher returning from a job-related anniversary dinner on a rainy night. On the same road, a driver had been involved in a one-vehicle accident, with the car stopped diagonally in the road. A good Samaritan stopped and called 911. The 911 operator told the good Samaritan to give the phone to the driver of the crashed vehicle. When the good Samaritan approached the crashed vehicle, the defendant struck the vehicle from behind, throwing the good Samaritan onto the road and putting him into a coma. Because the victim was in a coma, the defendant was looking at possible manslaughter charges. Mr. Foley was co-council on this case Mr. Foley hired the accident reconstructionist normally used by the state in order to show that alcohol was not a cause of the accident. The accident reconstructionist determined that there was no causation. Accordingly, Mr. Foley and his co-council convinced the state attorney to reduce the Felony Serious Bodily Injury to a simple misdemeanor DUI. Defendant received 12 months probation.
Facts: Officer M. responded to reports of a male being violent, throwing things, who fled in a white vehicle. Upon arrival, a vehicle was heard in the area screeching the tires and revving the engine. The defendant was observed seconds later driving into the complex in a white SUV erratically. The defendant was stopped, at which time defendant stumbled out of the vehicle. Officer M. observed a strong smell of alcohol on the defendant’s breath, and his clothing, which were also soiled. Defendant was asked for his ID, which he did not have. Defendant’s eyes were bloodshot, red and watery. Defendant struggled to follow the directions when spoken to, and could not give a coherent account of events. Officer M. requested the defendant to perform roadside exams. Defendant was guided to a safe location to perform the exams. Defendant did poorly on all portions of the exams. Defendant was arrested and transported to the station. Responded to administer the breath exam using the station’s Intoxilyzer 8000. The defendant provided two breath samples (.217, .203). Defendant was transported to the jail. Witnesses 1 and 2 advised during roadside that defendant almost ran them over while they were walking on the side of the road. Defendant was driving his vehicle on the sidewalk.
Facts: The defendant did commit the violation of driving under the influence of an alcoholic beverage. The defendant did then and there unlawfully drive, or was in actual physical control of a motor vehicle, while he was under the influence of an alcoholic beverage to the extent that his normal faculties were impaired, or with a blood alcohol level of .08 percent, to-wit: refusal.
At the time, Officer D. responded to the location in reference to a DUI investigation. Upon arrival, Officer D. met with Officer B., who advised that he had stopped arrestee (defendant) in reference to a traffic violation. Officer B. stated that he had observed the defendant driving a vehicle westbound and did fail to drive within a single lane. Upon meeting with the defendant, Officer B. believed that the arrestee may have been impaired and thus requested Officer D.’s presence.
Officer D. met with the defendant, who was leaning on the right side of his vehicle. Officer D. asked the defendant to meet him about 15 feet east from his vehicle, and as he walked, Officer D. noticed that he had an open and uneven gait. Once the defendant was in front of Officer D., Officer D. made the following observations: very strong odor of alcoholic beverage emanating from his breath, flushed colored face, bloodshot watery and glassy eyes, very slurred speech, swayed from left to right approximately six inches. Officer D. positively identified the defendant from his driver’s license. Officer D. advised defendant that he would be conducting a criminal investigation to determine if he was DUI and asked if he would perform some voluntary field sobriety exercises, at which time he stated that he would. Before beginning the exercises, Officer D. asked the defendant for some basic information. Illnesses or present injuries – none. Disabilities – none. Medications, prescribed or over the counter – advised that he takes prescribed acene medication on a daily basis. Diabetes – no. Under a doctor’s care – advises that he sees the doctor in reference to the skin problem.
Note: internal clock seven seconds estimated as thirty seconds.
Officer D. then made the determination that the defendant was impaired and took him into custody for DUI. Officer D. then asked the defendant if he would take a breath test and he began to question the reason for the test. Officer D. then read the defendant the Florida Implied Consent from a prepared text in the presence of Officers L. and B. The defendant then stated that he would take the test. Officer D. then transported the defendant to the station for processing.
While en route to the station, an odor of an alcoholic beverage was emanating from the defendant’s breath and was present inside the police vehicle. Once at the station, Officer D. conducted a 20-minute observation of the defendant. While conducting the first breath test the defendant became very argumentative and thus resulting in sample #1 as no sample provided. Officer D. then warned defendant that if he did not follow directions and provide a proper breath sample, it would be understood as a refusal. The defendant then advised that he would comply, but while taking the second sample, the defendant did not follow the directions by not giving a consistent breath, thus sample #2 resulted in volume not met. Officer D. then began a second breath test and re-instructed on the proper way of giving the breath sample. Once again the defendant did not follow the directions and did not give a consistent breath, once again resulting as volume not met. The defendant continued to do the same during sample #2 thus resulting in volume not met again. During sample #2 Officer D. initiated a refusal of the defendant by pressing on the “R” key of the instrument.
A driver’s license check revealed the defendant had prior DUI. Thus, the defendant was charged accordingly.
Process: Mr. Foley filed a motion to suppress the evidence gathered during the traffic stop. Mr. Foley argued the defendant had not violated the Florida Statute for failure to drive in a single lane, because the defendant’s lane change without a signal did not affect any other traffic. Therefore, the officer lacked probable cause to initiate a traffic stop. The court granted the motion.
Process: Mr. Foley filed a Motion to Dismiss. After receiving the said motion, the state attorneys office offered to reduce the charge to Reckless Driving and the defendant accepted.
While in the area, officer heard a loud crash, observed silver car blocking the far westbound lane. The car had rear-ended a parked vehicle. Officer observed ∆ place vehicle in reverse, then flee southbound on roar at high rate of speed. Officer initiated a traffic stop. Officer made contact with ∆ who had very strong odor of an alcoholic beverage emitting from his breath. ∆ had bloodshot eyes and flushed face. ∆ was offered field sobriety exercises and he agreed. ∆ did not perform field sobriety exercises to standards and was subsequently arrested without incident.

References: V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V.