|
DUI Recent Case Wins
DUI - Not Guilty after Jury Trial
A cop saw him leave a bar. He picked up a woman who needed a ride.
She was not a prostitute. However, he said he wanted a blow job. She
needed a ride home. She started to give him a blow job. The cop
pulls up beside the car and notices her head going up and down. The
officer said he reeked of alcohol, had bloodshot eyes, slurred
speech and was unsteady on his feet. However, he was polite and
cooperative with the officer. The second time was the charm for my
client. His DUI was tried by another attorney the first time, which
resulted in a hung jury. After I tried the case, a jury found him
not guilty after mere minutes of discussion.
DUI dropped to Reckless Driving -
Motion to Suppress Blood Results GRANTED
The client was driving was driving recklessly and completely totaled
his car. He rammed it into a tree. He kept saying "I'm sorry" to the
officer at the scene. The officer noted he had bloodshot eyes,
slurred speech, a bloody chin and red marks on his chest. The red
marks, according to the officer, were consistent with an air bag
being deployed. The client was taken to the hospital. He was read
implied consent. He initially agreed to let the nurse take his
blood. However, when they went to take it he said "I know my rights,
I want to speak with my lawyer, you're going to have to kill me if
you want to take my blood." The nurses and cops held him down and
drugged him up. Then they took his blood. The reading came back
.156, almost exactly twice the legal limit of .08. I filed a motion
to suppress the blood, saying the taking of the blood was not
voluntary and the client's injuries did not amount to serious bodily
injury. The judge agreed and granted the motion to suppress. Two
days later, I negotiated a reckless driving for the client. The
terms of the negotiated plea did not include a license suspension,
car immobilization or random testing for alcohol or drugs at his
expense.
DUI - State concedes motion to
suppress and drops DUI
The client was a decorated World War II veteran. It was an absolute
honor to represent him, as my grandfather was also a decorated World
War II vet. In court, I kid you not, people actually saluted him
like he was a hero. He was a hero. He loaded the atomic bombs that
went to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Although those bombs killed many
people, they saved countless American lives and brought the war to
an end. I filed a motion to suppress the stop and seizure of my
client. The motion was so strong that the Prosecutor agreed it was a
bad stop. The stop was based on a BOLO (be on the lookout for) a
certain vehicle and the description of the individual and direction
of travel did not match. There was no mention in the BOLO of whether
the client was White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, or a description of
his clothing. Also, the direction of travel was not consistent with
the BOLO.
DUI - All charges dropped
Although my client had been drinking, the State could not prove that
my client was the driver of the car. I also won the department of
motor vehicles hearing. My client got his license back.
DUI WITH COCAINE - Not Guilty after
Jury Trial
The client was rip-roaring drunk and had a trace amount of cocaine
in his system. I filed a motion to keep the witnesses from
testifying about the cocaine. The judge granted my motion. The state
failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that my client was in
actual physical control of the vehicle.
DUI WITH AN ACCIDENT- Motion to
Suppress the Breath Results GRANTED
DUI with an accident. Judge Barry Cohen suppressed the extremely
high breath readings of .265 and .253 because the State violated my
client's constitutional rights based on Shiver v State, 30 FLW D653
(FL 1st DCA March 8, 2005). Judge Cohen opined that "Because it has
been established in Shiver that the breath test affidavit contains
testimonial hearsay evidence, the admissibility of the affidavit
alone would constitute a violation of the Confrontation Clause."
DUI - Not Guilty after Jury Trial
The client was observed striking a median, making an abrupt lane
change, making a wide turn and again striking the shoulder of the
road. The officer turned on his lights, but the client made no
attempt to stop. Eventually, the client stopped. The officer noted
he smelled of alcohol, was having a hard time standing, and was
leaning against the car for support. The client performed poorly on
the roadside exercises, but refused the breath test. He stated "I
only had two beers." His speech was slow and slurred. At trial, the
jury agreed with me that there was a lack of evidence to convict.
The government did not prove their case beyond all reasonable doubt.
DUI - Sentence reversed and vacated
on appeal
At trial, the judge limited cross examination questions. We
successfully argued that the state went into new material on their
re-direct examination. We were entitled to cross the officer about
it. We proffered the questions we would have asked. The appellate
court agreed and reversed the client's conviction. When the case
came back from the appellate court, the client got a reckless
driving offer.
DUI - Not Guilty after Jury Trial
The client swerved erratically, jerked the car back into another
lane, crossed the dividing line between lanes. He had bloodshot,
watery eyes, slow, slurred speech, odor of alcohol on his breath,
couldn't find his driver's license, and fumbled through his papers
looking for his insurance and registration. He admitted to playing
pool and having "a few beers." At trial, we proved to the jury why
he had slurred speech. He was born with a speech impediment. It is
not against the law to drink and drive so long as you don't blow
over a .08 or your normal faculties are not impaired. The jury heard
him speak. He always speaks with a lisp. He performed poorly on the
roadside exercises.
DUI - Not Guilty after Jury Trial
My client was caught speeding, driving erratically. He performed
poorly on the roadside exercises. I filed a motion in limine, which
was granted, to keep out statements he made on video that
incriminated him in a prior DUI. Not guilty in ten minutes!
DUI Manslaughter
The State must prove the defendant drove or was in actual physical
control of a vehicle, and while driving or in actual physical
control of the vehicle, the defendant was under the influence of
alcohol and/or drugs to the extent that his normal faculties were
impaired or the defendant had a blood or breath alcohol level of
0.08 or higher. Last, as a result, the defendant caused or
contributed to the cause of the death of the victim.
Defenses to Murder Charges
Florida Murder Defense Lawyer
Self Defense as a Defense to Murder
He hit me first! I was just defending myself! Often, the best
defense to a murder or homicide charge is self-defense. The essence
of self-defense is someone hit you first, pulled a dangerous weapon
or a gun on you or you thought they were going to immediately hit or
shoot you and you shot or struck them. The whole issue at trial is
going to be whether your actions of self-defense were reasonable.
For instance, you cant shoot somebody if they are only using their
hands to punch you. However, if the other person had a gun, that's a
different story. Generally, the defense has no burden of proof.
However, with a self-defense claim, we have to prove that you
reasonably believed your conduct was necessary to defend yourself
against the accusers imminent use of unlawful force. Also, we must
prove that the use of unlawful force by the accuser must have
appeared to you to be ready to take place.
In Florida, there is no duty to retreat. The legislature, after
much lobbying from the National Rifle Association, passed this law.
This relatively new "stand your ground" law is an excellent tool for
murder or homicide criminal defense lawyers. You now have the right
to defend yourself and stand your ground, even using deadly force
with a gun, if you are abiding by the law and get attacked. However,
you must reasonably believe your actions were necessary to prevent
death or great bodily harm.
The jury must judge you by the circumstances you were surrounded
by at the time the force was used. Every case is different. What is
reasonable self-defense is defined by the jury that you and your
criminal defense lawyer pick.
Defense of Others
I was just protecting another person from a maniac! That's
essentially the defense of others.
The whole issue at trial is going to be whether your actions in
defending another person were reasonable. For instance, for defense
of others, you cant shoot somebody if they are only kicking the
other person with their feet. Generally, the defense has no burden
of proof. However, with a defense of others claim, we have to prove
that you reasonably believed your conduct was necessary to defend
another person against the accusers imminent use of unlawful force.
Also, we must prove that the use of unlawful force by the accuser
took place or must have appeared to you to be ready to take place.
The jury must judge you by the circumstances you were surrounded
by at the time the force was used. Every case is different. What is
reasonable defense of others is defined by the jury that you and
your criminal defense lawyer pick.
Justifiable Homicide
The killing of a human being is justifiable homicide and lawful if
necessarily done while resisting an attempt to murder or commit a
felony upon the defendant, or to commit a felony in any dwelling
house in which the defendant was at the time of the killing.
Excusable Homicide
The killing of a human being is excusable, and therefore lawful,
under any one of the following three circumstances:
- When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune in
doing any lawful act by lawful means with usual ordinary caution
and without any unlawful intent, or
- When the killing occurs by accident and misfortune in the
heat of passion, upon any sudden and sufficient provocation, or
- When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune
resulting from a sudden combat, if a dangerous weapon* is not
used and the killing is not done in a cruel or unusual manner.
* "Dangerous weapon" is any weapon that, taking
into account the manner in which it is used, is likely to produce
death or great bodily harm.
If you are facing murder charges and need a Florida
murder attorney, call me.
Contact Grey Tesh
Federal Criminal Defense Lawyer
Murder or Homicide Charges Defense Attorney
aaacriminaldefense.com has its principal
office at 1610 Southern Boulevard in West Palm Beach, Florida, Mr.
Tesh represents clients charged with serious federal criminal
offenses before Federal Criminal Courts in Miami, Fort Lauderdale,
West Palm Beach, Stuart, Martin County, Port St. Lucie, Vero Beach,
Jacksonville, Tampa, Orlando, Tallahassee, and all federal courts
throughout the United States of America.
Defenses to manslaughter, Lawyer for manslaughter, homicide, murder,
first degree, second degree, Manslaughter Murder Lawyer,
Manslaughter Murder Attorney, Manslaughter Homicide Lawyer,
Manslaughter Homicide Attorney, Manslaughter Palm Beach Murder
Lawyer, Federal crimes lawyer,
Federal crimes lawyer, federal criminal attorney, west palm beach
criminal lawyer, west palm beach criminal defense, fort lauderdale
federal lawyer, west palm beach, florida, fort pierce criminal
lawyer, federal criminal defense attorney, Miami federal criminal
lawyer, federal lawyer west palm beach, florida attorney, west palm
beach lawyer, attorney, federal appeals. If convicted, you have only
ten (10) days in Federal Court, as opposed to thirty (30) days in
Florida, to file a notice of appeal. If you want to appeal a
conviction, you must contact
a Federal criminal appeals attorney immediately as time is of the
essence.
|
