Case Results
Find out how we’ve helped real people facing charges
Below are recent jury trial results from Lakeland, FL criminal defense lawyer Thomas C. Grajek, Attorney at Law. No attorney wins all their trials. Many of my trials are difficult cases many other lawyers would not try. Even though my client may have been found guilty, I will have learned a wealth of information to use at my next trial. It also provides an incentive to work even harder, so I do not lose the next case.
When researching criminal defense attorneys to represent you, pay attention to their results. Does the attorney list their jury trials? Are they honest enough to list their losses or just the victories? Take this into account when you’re choosing a lawyer.
Note that these results, while representative, are not a guarantee or promise of any specific result. The facts and circumstances of your case may differ from the facts and circumstances described in the below representative cases.
DUI Jury Trial – Driving Under The Influence – Not Guilty Verdict
May 28, 2024
My client was charged with DUI after their vehicle ended up in a ditch. The sheriff responded and, seeing the accident, immediately thought, "This must be a DUI!" The deputy investigating the accident testified he smelled an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and that my client urinated on themselves (which is what drunk people do, right?) So, the DUI unit came out and requested if they would do Field Sobriety Tests which my client SMARTLY DECLINED TO PERFORM! My client was arrested anyway and then SMARTLY REFUSED THE BREATH TEST! This is what we call a "Double Refusal" in DUI lingo. Our witness testified that our client acted normal in every way and there was not even an odor of alcohol on their breath. I was able to explain to the jury that the police did not investigate this case properly, the Polk County deputy's evidence conflicted with each other, and there was just a total lack of evidence of DUI. The jury agreed and found my client NOT GUILTY!
DUI Jury Trial – Driving Under The Influence – Not Guilty Verdict
Polk County – January 18, 2024
My client was accused of speeding, driving with no headlights, almost hitting other vehicles, and having a Breath Test result of 0.112 and 0.113 over the legal limit of 0.08. The Haines City Police Department tried to say she failed the Field Sobriety Exercises, but we were able to prove that was not the case. We were able to show the jury that there actually was no improper driving and that my client performed well on the Field Sobriety Exercises (FSE) at the roadside. By researching this Intoxylyzer, I found problems with the monthly inspections. I was also able to explain to the jury why the Breath Test machine was not to be trusted due to both its monthly maintenance and how the Breath test was administered to my client.
DUI – Driving Under The Influence – Not Guilty Verdict
Polk County – January 18, 2024
My client allegedly blew 0.105 and 0.112 which is over the legal limit of 0.08. My client was pulled over for allegedly driving off the roadway and crossing the yellow traffic lines. The Auburndale Police Department also thought he failed the Field Sobriety Exercises (SFST). The investigation was conducted by a Drug Recognition Expert (DRE), who is an officer with the most extensive training an officer can get for DUI cases. The jury found my client NOT GUILTY after I was able to show the issues with the investigation, that the evidence was not consistent, and that my client was exhausted, not impaired.
Domestic Violence Jury Trial – Not Guilty Verdict
Polk County – January 11, 2024
My client was charged with Domestic Violence for hitting, pushing, and slapping the “alleged victim.” I was able to prove these were false allegations as part of an “agenda crime” where the allegations were made up to get an advantage in a custody dispute in a divorce case.
Two (2) Counts of Aggravated Assault and One (1) Count of 1° Criminal Mischief – Not Guilty Of All Felony Charges – Guilty Of Lessers Of Exhibition Of A Dangerous Weapon And 2° Criminal Mischief
Polk County – October 16, 2024
My client was charged with threatening two (2) people with a pocketknife. My client was out walking his dog when he was almost run over by a neighbor. My client went looking for the speeder. Eventually, my client found the person on the porch smoking cigarettes with a relative. My client tried to talk to him, but they refused. The two people alleged that my client showed them a pocket knife from 30 feet away. My client denied doing so. After the two people went into the house, my client stabbed the tire of the car that almost ran him over (criminal mischief charge) and left. The jury found my client NOT GUILTY OF ALL FELONY CHARGES.
My client was found GUILTY of two (2) misdemeanors. The jury found him guilty of Exhibiting a Dangerous Weapon (pocketknife) against one of the people on the porch, but not the other person on the porch. The statute excludes a pocketknife from the “dangerous weapon”, but some appellate courts have ruled that an “open” pocketknife is a weapon under Florida Statute 790.10. The jury found the tire damage was less than what the speeder wanted for the tire even though we did not argue the amount at all.
This case helps explain about “Lesser Included Charges.” A Lesser Included Offense is one that is necessarily included in the original offense that has been charged. For example, in a DUI with Serious Bodily Injury, the lesser offense is a simple DUI. The DUI has the same elements except for a person being injured. The DUI SBI is a felony, and the simple DUI is a less serious misdemeanor.
My advice was to not include the lesser included offenses, but my client wanted them because he did not want to go “all or nothing” on the felonies. It is the client’s life and his decision. I still think he would have been found Not Guilty of the felony had the lesser not been included, but we will never know. It was still a major victory to beat the felony charges and the plea offer that required him to plead guilty to a felony charge. Because we won at trial, my client is not guilty of any felonies.
DUI Jury Trial – Guilty Verdict – Leaving The Scene of An Accident With Serious Bodily Injury 3° Felony (5 Years Max) - Plea To A Lesser 2° Misdemeanor (60 Days Max)
Hillsborough County – January 18, 2024
No trial lawyer wins all their cases. I post my losses, too, because I learn more from my trial losses than my wins. This was a tough case, but we had to try it because my client also had a serious pending felony charge.
These charges occurred during two separate events and were months apart. If a person is arrested, they typically bond out of jail. If that person gets arrested again, the bond is revoked on the original arrest, and the person is held until the original charge is resolved. That meant we had to try the DUI case to get my client out of jail AND to have a chance at sealing the felony arrest.
Unfortunately, the DUI had bad facts. There was a video that showed my client crossing the lane lines at least 7 times while the officer was behind my client. My client denied drinking, then changed his story and said that he had drank alcohol. Then, my client decided to tell the officer he had smoked marijuana, too. THIS IS WHY YOU DO NOT TALK TO THE POLICE! YOU ARE JUST ASKING FOR A GUILTY VERDICT. Even though everyone in the courtroom, including the alternate juror, thought we would win the case, the jury did not, and they were the ones that mattered. There is a lot I learned from this case that just makes me a better trial lawyer in the future.
The original felony case ended up with a tremendous result. I was able to get the case reduced to the lowest level misdemeanor despite the prosecutor originally seeking prison time. In the end, it was a great result for two very tough cases and NO FELONY CHARGES.
DUI Jury Trial – Driving Under The Influence – Not Guilty Verdict
Polk County – April 19, 2022
My client was passed out in a McDonald’s drive-thru. The McDonald’s employees tried for about 10 minutes to wake them, but they were out. Just when the deputy arrived, my client woke up and was stopped by the deputy. The deputy found an open bottle of liquor in the front seat and called the DUI unit. My client was smart enough to call his girlfriend to the scene. When she arrived, the deputy would not let her watch or film the Field Sobriety Exercises. Why do you think the police did not want her to make a video? The Polk County Sheriff DOES NOT VIDEOTAPE DUI ARRESTS. Fortunately for us, she was able to make a 60-second video of the DUI investigation. Even though there were only 60 seconds of video, it was a MAJOR PART OF OUR DEFENSE.
The video captured part of the Walk-and-Turn Exercise, which is one of the three (3) the police have a person perform (if they want to voluntarily perform, which is usually not a good idea, especially if there is no video). We were able to show with that short video that the deputies testified to on the witness stand was not the truth. The video helped prove my client stood normally, spoke normally, acted in an emergency normally, and how difficult those DUI exercises are to perform. My client was smart enough to refuse the Breath Test after he felt he should not have been arrested. The jury agreed and he was found NOT GUILTY OF DUI.
Aggravated Assault With A Deadly Weapon 3° Felony – Not Guilty
October 17, 2022
My client was charged with pointing a gun at a woman. It was a classic “he said-she said” case. The alleged victim said my client pointed a gun at her and my client denied even having a gun that day. This case started out just like most cases involving guns in Polk County, the prosecutor wanted prison time. The offer went from 18 months down to a year-and-a-day and finally 6 months in jail. That would have made my client a convicted felon and had him sitting in jail or prison for something he did not do. Instead, he trusted me, and we went to trial.
He was accused of getting into a fight with a relative. The relative went running into the house. The relative’s baby mama came out looking to see what was going on when she alleged that my client pointed a gun at her. We were able to show the jury that she was mistaken and there never was a gun and the jury found my client NOT GUILTY IN 15 MINUTES!
DUI Jury Trial – Driving Under The Influence – Not Guilty Verdict
Polk County – September 18, 2021
My client had a CDL license and this was his 2nd DUI. Originally, the prosecutor wanted a lot of jail time to settle the case. My client just wanted to avoid jail time. I was able to get him a plea offer with no jail time, but then his boss told him if he pled to the DUI, he would lose his job. So, we had to go to trial. This is why you need an experienced trial attorney to handle your case because you never know when you will have to go to trial due to your job, a jail offer, or your need to travel to Canada.
My client was pulled over for speeding and violating the “move-over” law as he supposedly sped past two (2) cop cars on the side of the road that were investigating someone else. The police chased my client down and then had him perform Field Sobriety Exercises which he bombed! How bad?
On the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN – eye test), he allegedly exhibited all 6 clues of impairment on that exercise;
In the Walk-and-Turn (WAT), he allegedly exhibited 4 out of 8 clues of impairment;
On the One-Leg-Stand (OLS), he allegedly exhibited 3 out of 4 clues of impairment.
To the officer, that meant that he was definitely impaired. But the jury disagreed. After I explained and showed the jury how a DUI investigation is supposed to be conducted and what a person should look for to determine whether the person is impaired or not, the jury came back with a NOT GUILTY VERDICT IN 8 MINUTES!!!
DUI Jury Trial – Driving Under The Influence – Not Guilty Verdict
Polk County – February 7, 2019
My client was accused of doing a burn-out, losing control of his car, and driving into a bush. This was in a neighborhood with children in the area, so they were very serious allegations. Just like every other DUI case, the police alleged my client had glassy, bloodshot eyes and an odor of alcohol on his breath and was slurring his words. Of course, he did not perform well on the Field Sobriety Exercises, and there was no video for us to point to and say, “Hey! He actually did great on those exercises!” That’s why the police do not videotape or make audio recordings in cases. This is slowly changing, and we are now seeing more agencies use body and dashcams. We were able to show the jury the police did a poor investigation and my client’s version of the events was true. In order to do this you need a lawyer who knows how DUI’s are investigated and knows how to try a case. That means you need a lawyer who has experience and training in trying cases and how to persuade juries.
DUI Non-Jury Trial – Driving Under The Influence - Not Guilty
Polk County
As a trial attorney, you have to know when to go to trial and when it might be best for your client to take a plea offer. This case was a little different. A trial attorney also has to know WHO TO TRY THE CASE TO…A JURY OR A JUDGE! There are circumstances where you can do a Non-Jury Trial” or “Trial by Bench” where the Judge decides whether the accused is Guilty or Innocent. In this case, another attorney asked me to help them with the trial because it was a Driving Under the Influence of Drugs (DUID) case investigated by a Drug Recognition Expert (DRE). I have a lot of training and experience in those types of cases, so they asked me to help out. Don’t worry, I ask my attorney friends for their opinions and advice all the time. You have to in order to get the best results for your clients.
Due to the issues in this case, we decided it was better to have a judge who is trained in the law and has experience with DUIs decide the verdict. We were correct in choosing a judge who found our client NOT GUILTY immediately at the conclusion of the case.
DUI Jury Trial – Not Guilty Verdict
Polk County 2014-CT-002726-WH, Not Guilty Verdict March 10, 2015 – Judge Griffin
My client was arrested by the Lake Hamilton Police Department. After being pulled over, he performed the Field Sobriety Exercises including the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN) test, the Walk and Turn, One Leg Stand, and Finger-to-Nose Tests. It was my opinion that he passed these “tests” and did not show impairment. My client refused the breath test because he did not feel he should have been arrested in the first place. At trial, I brought in an expert on Field Sobriety Tests so that we could explain to the jury why the officer conducted and scored the exercises incorrectly. The jury agreed and my client was found Not Guilty.
DUI Jury Trial with 0.19 Blow – Not Guilty Verdict
Polk County 2012-CT-011466-WH, Not Guilty Verdict December 10, 2013 – Judge Griffin
My client was arrested for DUI by the Lake Hamilton Police Dept. and given a breath test by the Polk County Sheriff’s Office. Sgt. Nunemaker testified that my client was crossing over the traffic lines numerous times and tried to make a right hand turn where no road existed. After submitting to the field sobriety exercises, my client was given a breath test and the results were 0.192 and 0.192, over twice the legal limit of 0.08.
However, knowing the problems with the breath test machine (Intoxilyzer 8000), I was able to explain to the jury the flaws and errors of the breath test machine – and thus why they should not believe the breath test results in this DUI case. Also, by investigating the case and obtaining the video of the driving, I was able to prove to the jury that the driving pattern was quite different from what the police testified to on the stand. The jury found my client Not Guilty.
Prostitution – Motion to Suppress Granted
Polk County 2013-MM-004906-BA, Motion to Suppress Granted October 10, 2013 – Judge Fegers
My client was arrested in the Polk County Sheriff prostitution sting and charged with solicitation for lewdness that mandates the $5,000.00 “civil penalty.” I filed a motion to suppress arguing that the arrest was illegal and violated his constitutional rights. (A motion to suppress is a legal document requesting the court throw evidence out in a criminal case.) The court agreed and found there was no “probable cause” to arrest my client. This suppressed or excluded from court my client’s identity and any of his alleged statements to the police. Because the court found no probable cause, the prosecutor was unable to prove the case to the much higher “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard needed for a criminal conviction.
DUI Charge Reduced to Leaving the Scene of an Accident
Lakeland PD DUI 2012-CT-011100-LD, DUI reduced August 26, 2013 – Judge Abdoney
Why should you retain a criminal defense attorney who files motions and tries cases? This case is a prime example of what an aggressive defense attorney can do for you.
My client was charged with DUI after allegedly striking another car in a parking lot. My client would lose his job if he was convicted of a DUI and needed a DUI lawyer who would fight for him. By filing a Motion to Suppress in his case, I was able to educate the prosecutor about the problems with the case: the Lakeland Police officer did not do a proper job of investigating the DUI, conducting the Field Sobriety Exercises, and collecting evidence in the case. By doing the motion work and knowing the law as it applied to DUI charges, I was able to get his charges reduced and save his job.
Making Harassing Phone Calls – Case Dismissed
Criminal case dismissed August 21, 2013 – Judge Williams
My client was accused of Making Harassing Phone Calls. These cases often arise in domestic situations or after two people break up. Many times, the person receiving the calls will sign a “waiver of Prosecution.” This criminal charge can be difficult for the prosecutor to prove in court. I set my client’s case for trial and the charges were dropped at the trial date.
DUI Suspension Invalidated under Formal Review
DHSMV suspension invalidated August 12, 2013
This was my first DUI case to be heard under the then-new Formal Review rules. My client and I discussed his options: have a Formal Review hearing to attack the suspension, or waive the hearing to get him an immediate hardship license with no hard suspension to his driving privileges. I always prefer to have the Formal Review hearing if possible, and this case shows exactly why: we won the Formal Review hearing, and the license suspension was invalidated.
DUI Reduced to Reckless Driving and Withhold Adjudication
Polk County DUI 2013-CT-000148-BA, DUI reduced August 15, 2013 – Judge Williams
My client was arrested for DUI with a 0.145 and 0.135 breath test results. After filing numerous motions and having an evidentiary hearing to attack the DUI case and get evidence excluded, the prosecutor agreed to reduce the charge to Reckless Driving with Alcohol as a Factor. In addition, my client was able to get a withhold of adjudication so he would not receive points on his license and not be convicted of this crime. That makes this case eligible for sealing the arrest/criminal record.
DUI Charge Dismissed after Motion to Suppress Granted
Polk County DUI 2012-CT-009953-LD, Case Dismissed July 30, 2013 – Judge Abdoney – Lakeland Division
If you are looking to retain an attorney for your criminal case, ask that lawyer when they last filed and argued a Motion to Suppress. Would you rather have your case dismissed or go through an unnecessary jury trial where you could end up in jail?
In this case, after the Motion to Suppress was granted by the trial court, all evidence against my client was thrown out in his DUI case. The prosecutor could not go forward and was forced to drop the DUI charge.
DUI Dismissed – and 40 Other Lakeland DUI Cases Dropped!
Lakeland DUI case 2013-CT-009984-LD – DUI DISMISSED July 19, 2013
My client was arrested for DUI by Officer Edds of the Lakeland Police Department. This officer was involved in my DUI trial regarding the procedure LPD officers use when completing DUI reports. My trial was featured in the Ledger’s and News Channel 8’s investigation into LPD. Sgt. Lloyd also received a “no confidence” letter from the prosecutor. Because of the issues I found in these Lakeland DUI cases, about 40 other cases where the driver was arrested by Ofc. Edds and Sgt. Lloyd were dropped by the prosecutor.
I also won my client’s Formal Review hearing, so there was no license suspension and no indication on his license that he was arrested for DUI.
DUI – Not Guilty Jury Verdict
Polk County DUI case CT-12-012547-BA, NOT GUILTY July 2, 2013 – Judge Flood
What do Superman, X-ray vision, and spaghetti have to do with a not guilty verdict in a DUI trial?
A good criminal defense attorney must know how to educate and entertain a jury. If a defense lawyer cannot capture a jury’s attention and get them to listen to your defense, you will not win your trial. This is one of the reasons it’s so important to have a local attorney defending your trial – I know how to get a Polk County jury’s attention, and I know how to thoroughly investigate a charge and find the right evidence to persuade them.
This case was a Polk County Sheriff DUI arrest with no video, where my client admitted to drinking 6 draft beers in an hour and the deputy testified my client did very poorly on all field sobriety exercises. Most of the motions were denied and the prosecutor refused to reduce the DUI charge, so my client had no choice but to go to trial. By visiting the scene of the arrest on multiple occasions and weaving Superman, X-ray vision, and spaghetti into my theory of defense, I was able to get a 30-minute Not Guilty jury verdict. My knowledge of PCSO policies and this deputy’s training helped me win this case.
Motion Granted to Terminate Felony Probation Early
Polk County case CF-12-003455 – Probation terminated July 1, 2013
My client was placed on probation for felon in possession of a firearm. After completing half his probation, all special conditions of his probation, and paying all the fines, I filed a motion to terminate his probation early. The court granted the motion and my client is no longer on felony probation. This is important because he no longer runs the risk of violating his probation and ending up in prison.
DUI Charge Dismissed
Polk County case CT-12-010919-BA, DUI dropped June 27, 2013 – Judge Fegers
My client was arrested by a Florida Highway Patrol Trooper. I was able to obtain the video of the DUI arrest including my client’s driving pattern and the trooper’s DUI investigation. I determined that the trooper did not perform the DUI investigation correctly and according to the law.
I filed a motion to suppress the Field Sobriety Exercises (Tests is what law enforcement likes to call them) asking the court to exclude any evidence that field sobriety exercises were performed and any evidence obtained after the FSE’s. The court granted my motion and threw out all the DUI evidence in the case, leaving the prosecutor with no choice but to drop the DUI charge.
I also won the driver’s Formal Review hearing so there are no indications on his license that he was ever arrested for this DUI.
Refusal to Submit to Breath Testing Dismissed
Polk County case CT-12-010920-BA, Refusal to submit to breath testing dropped June 27, 2013 – Judge Fegers
This refusal case was a companion case to the DUI above, and the prosecutor was forced to dismiss the case after I successfully got the evidence excluded when I won the Motion to Suppress Evidence.
DUI Not Guilty Jury Trial Verdict – Trial featured on News Channel 8
Lakeland DUI case 2012-TT-009984-LD NOT GUILTY verdict June 18, 2013 – Judge Abdoney
Monday, June 10, 2013, I selected a jury for my client charged with DUI. In Polk County criminal cases, you select a jury on Monday and the actual trial is on a different day later in the week. It took over 4 hours to select the jury. Jury selection or “Voir Dire” is often called the most critical part of a trial. If a jury is not open to your arguments and defense, you will not win your trial.
The trial was on Tuesday and lasted until 10:30 p.m. During this trial, due to my thorough investigation of this DUI case and my knowledge about Lakeland Police Department procedures in DUI investigations, I was able to uncover newsworthy evidence that aided in the defense to this DUI arrest. This evidence and my cross-examination were featured on News Channel 8 which was doing an extremely thorough and in-depth investigation into LPD.
The evidence I discovered is just one of many reasons why you need a criminal defense attorney actually located in Polk County to defend you in court. Many attorneys advertising on the Internet are not located in Polk County. You also need an attorney with the experience and fighting spirit who will stand up for you in court.
Improper Exhibition of a Firearm Charges Dismissed at Jury Trial
Polk County criminal case 2012-MM-014408-BA tried and dismissed May 14, 2013 – Judge Fegers
My client was charged with waving a firearm at an elderly lady while driving down the road. My client denied this ever occurred and the eyewitnesses, who were off-duty Polk County Sheriff deputies, made a mistake when they accused him of threatening this unknown woman with a firearm.
We took this case to jury trial. After the prosecutor presented their side of the case, Judge Fegers granted my motion for a Judgment of Acquittal, resulting in the charge being dismissed and my client going home a free and innocent man.
A Judgment of Acquittal is a motion made by a criminal defense attorney at the end of the prosecutor’s case that argues the prosecutor did not prove all the elements necessary to send the case to the jury for a verdict. That means a jury does not decide whether an accused person is guilty or not; the case is dismissed before you even get to that point. It is very rare to have a Judgment of Acquittal granted, but it is the best outcome because there is no risk of a guilty verdict.
Refusal to Submit to Testing After a DUI Arrest – Not Guilty Verdict
Polk County criminal case 2012-CT-005698-BA tried and dismissed March 4, 2013 – Judge Flood
My client was accused of refusing to submit to testing in violation of Florida Statute 316.1932. This charge arises when a driver is arrested for DUI a second time. That means the driver gets charged with 2 crimes – a second-offense DUI and refusal to submit to testing. These cases are extremely difficult to win at trial because the burden of proof for a conviction is so low. The prosecutor only has to prove “probable cause” to arrest the driver for DUI and that the person refused to submit to a breath or urine test. The prosecutor does not have to prove the driver was impaired beyond a reasonable doubt. In addition, the jury knows the person has a previous DUI conviction!
Nevertheless, I was able to prove my client should not have been arrested for DUI that night even though she was driving the wrong way on a divided highway at 60 mph right into the path of an oncoming Polk County Sheriff’s patrol car. The jury agreed that it was a simple mistake of texting on a dark road and that my client showed no signs of impairment. The jury found my client Not Guilty.
Driving Under the Influence – Formal Review Win, License Suspension set aside
Polk County DUI citation 4862-XEG, unlawful breath alcohol level suspension set aside June 10, 2013
My client was arrested for DUI by a Lakeland DUI squad officer. The DHSMV suspended his license for having a breath test result over the 0.08 legal limit. I cross-examined the arresting officer and breath test operator and was able to get the 6-month license suspension invalidated.
Driving Under the Influence – Motion to Suppress Granted
Polk County criminal case 2012-CT-009953-LD Motion granted May 30, 2013 – Judge Abdoney – Lakeland Division
My client was pulled over for speeding on S. Florida Ave. in Lakeland, FL. After he was pulled over, a DUI investigation was begun by a member of Lakeland P.D.’s DUI squad. Even though my client showed no signs of impairment on the DUI video, the DUI officer ordered him to perform field sobriety tests. The driver passed them, but not in the officer’s opinion, so he was arrested and transported to LPD for breath testing. Because he did not feel he should have been arrested, he refused to submit to breath testing.
The court granted my “motion to suppress” the field sobriety exercises, refusal to take the breath test, and my client’s identity – meaning the prosecutor cannot use the field sobriety exercises, breath test refusal, or identity of my client in court to prove my client was guilty of DUI. Without this evidence, there is no way to prove the charge of DUI.
Lakeland DUI Charge Dismissed
Lakeland DUI case TT-11-000539-LD dismissed April 2013
My client was arrested by Officer Cortes of the Lakeland Police Department’s DUI squad. After reviewing the video, I filed motions regarding the field sobriety exercises, stop of the driver’s truck, and whether a DUI investigation should have been conducted by the officer. The court granted my motion to suppress the field sobriety exercises (FSE’s). This meant the prosecutor could no longer use my client’s performance on the FSE’s to prove the DUI charge. With essentially no evidence left to prove my client’s guilt, the prosecutor dismissed the DUI charge.
DUI Reduced to Reckless Driving
Polk County DUI case 12-CT-008480-BA reduced to Reckless June 10, 2013
My client was arrested for DUI with a breath test result over 0.08. Because he retained me the day after his arrest, I was able to get the booking video of him at the Polk County Jail. The video showed that he was not impaired. I used this to convince the prosecutor to reduce his charge to Reckless Driving to keep the DUI off his record.
Do not let other DUI lawyers fool you. Many will post results saying “DUI dismissed,” when in fact the charge was reduced like this case. Retain an attorney who will be honest with you and does not overstate results.
DUI Reduced to Reckless Driving
Polk County DUI case 12-CT-007448-BA reduced to Reckless June 10, 2013
My client was arrested for DUI with a breath test result over 0.08. After filing motions to suppress, which were denied, I set the DUI for jury trial. I had the transcript of the Formal Review and video of the scene to show the prosecutor why the criminal charge should be reduced.
The deputy’s testimony at the Formal Review was different than the Motion to Suppress. The testimony in this case also differed from the DUI report. That is why you need a DUI attorney who will subpoena officers to a Formal Review hearing to try and find discrepancies in an officer’s testimony. Why should there be more than one version of what happened?
By doing this legal work, I was able to keep a DUI off my client’s record and avoid a 6-month driver’s license suspension.
Careless Driving – Citation DISMISSED
Polk County citation CI-13-011036-XX dismissed May 7, 2013.
My client was given a citation for Careless Driving. I strategically set the case for Arraignment. At that court date, I filed a motion to dismiss which was granted by the court. This keeps my client’s driving record clean and avoids an increase in their car insurance rates.
Aggravated Assault (Deadly Weapon) and Domestic Battery – Charges Dropped
Polk County criminal case 2013-CF-001940, charges dropped March 25, 2013.
My client was arrested for Aggravated Assault, a 3rd degree felony, and Domestic Violence, a misdemeanor, for allegedly throwing a bottle at the alleged victim and threatening the alleged victim with a knife. After someone is arrested, an aggressive criminal defense attorney will call the prosecutor and attempt to get the prosecutor to drop the charge. By explaining to the prosecutor these acts did not happen and my client’s version of what occurred, I was successful in getting the crime of violence charges dropped. My client never even had to go to court for these alleged crimes.
Injunction for Protection Against Domestic Violence – Dismissed
Polk County Petition for Injunction 53-2013DR-001878 dismissed March 2013.
If you have an injunction against you, it can subject you to arrest for violating the injunction. You also may not possess a firearm.
Possession of Cannabis – Charged Dismissed
Polk County case MM-11-006992-BA, criminal charges dismissed January 2012.
My client was charged with Possession of Marijuana after he was pulled over for a traffic infraction. The police requested consent to search, but my client exercised his rights and refused to allow law enforcement to search the vehicle. The deputy then called for a canine (K-9) unit to come to the scene and conduct a dog sniff of the vehicle. There were two people in the car and the marijuana was not on my client, so it was a constructive possession case. I filed a Motion to Suppress challenging the search by the canine unit and the charges were dropped at the hearing.
Possession of Cannabis – Charges Dismissed
Polk County case MM-11-007191-BA, criminal charges dismissed January 2012.
My client was charged with Possession of Marijuana after she was a passenger in a car pulled over for a traffic infraction. The police received consent to search from the driver. There was more than one person in the car and the marijuana was not on my client, so it was a constructive possession case. I filed a Motion to Suppress challenging the search and the charges were dropped at the hearing.
Petit Theft – Charges Dropped
Polk County Case, MM-11-001872-LD, January 2012
Domestic Violence – Charges Dropped
Polk County Case, MM-11-009697-BA, January 2012
Possession of Child Pornography (100 counts) – Not Guilty at Jury Trial
Bartow, Polk County, Florida Criminal CF-07-003861-XX case tried October 2008
My client was charged with 100 counts of Possession of Child Pornography. I filed a Motion to Suppress arguing that the search and seizure of the alleged child pornography was illegal. I argued that there was no search warrant and the informant’s hearsay statements to the police were unreliable and did not give police probable cause to search for evidence. The court denied the motion. Therefore, we went to trial and the jury found my client Not Guilty on all counts.
Please understand, I am not defending the crime of Child Pornography, but the citizen accused of the crime. How terrible would it be if an innocent person was wrongly accused and convicted of such a heinous crime?
3rd DUI Within 10 Years – Not Guilty Verdict
Lakeland, Polk County, Florida Criminal CF-10-000699-XX case tried February 2011
My client was charged with Driving Under the Influence. This was his 3rd DUI charge in 10 years which carries a 10-year driver’s license suspension. He was pulled over for allegedly failing to maintain a single lane, weaving, driving over a curb, and driving in the wrong lane of travel. The Motion to Suppress the stop of the vehicle was denied by the criminal court. The driver refused to perform field sobriety exercises, which is a right under the law. The alleged drunk driver also refused to submit to a breath test to determine the breath alcohol level. Therefore, we went to trial and the jury found my client Not Guilty.
Capital Sexual Battery – Not Guilty on 4 of 6 Counts
Bartow, Polk County, Florida Criminal Case CF-09-001818-XX
My client was charged with various sex crimes including 3 counts of Capital Sexual Battery. My client allegedly confessed during a controlled phone call tape recorded by the police. My client also allegedly confessed during his interrogation by the police which was captured on videotape. Both pieces of evidence were played for the jury during the trial the week of March 1, 2010. I argued that the statement to the police was a False Confession and should be disregarded by the jury. Even though the jury heard both alleged confessions, the jury still found my client Not Guilty of 4 of the 6 counts:
- Sexual Battery on Person less than 12 Years of Age (Capital Sexual Battery) GUILTY
- Sexual Battery on Person less than 12 Years of Age (Capital Sexual Battery) NOT GUILTY
- Sexual Battery on Person less than 12 Years of Age (Capital Sexual Battery) NOT GUILTY
- Lewd Molestation – GUILTY
- Lewd Molestation – NOT GUILTY
- Lewd or Lascivious Exhibition – NOT GUILTY
DUI – Not Guilty
Polk County Case TT-09-004228-BA
My client was charged with Driving Under the Influence. The deputy alleged that my client almost ran him over when the deputy flagged him down at the scene of an accident. The deputy chased him down, had him provide field sobriety exercises, and then arrested him for DUI. My client refused the breath test. There was no video evidence in the case. My client was found Not Guilty after the jury deliberated less than 5 minutes.
DUI & Careless Driving with Property Damage – Not Guilty
Polk County Case TT-09-001650-LD and CI-09-012431-LD
My client was charged with Driving Under the Influence after rear-ending a police car at a stop light. My client made numerous statements after the accident that “You’re going to arrest me for DUI because I have been drinking.” The officer alleged that my client did poorly on the field sobriety exercises, and then arrested her for DUI. My client refused the breath test. There was video evidence in the case.
My client was found Not Guilty of the DUI after the jury deliberated less than 20 minutes. The court then dismissed the civil infraction for rear-ending the police car.