DUI Dismissals 63

DUI DISMISSED – State v. Mr. A (Phoenix Municipal Court No. M-0741-4490506): Mr. A was stopped while sitting in his car in the parking lot of a restaurant. The restaurant manager had called 911 and reported that Mr. A was impaired. The officer claimed he had bloodshot, watery eyes and an odor of alcohol. During the eye test (HGN), Mr. A exhibited all 6 out of 6 cues and performed poorly on the other field sobriety tests (FSTs). Although Mr. A had a low BAC, his blood results showed the presence of marijuana. However, due to our arguments to the prosecutor that there was no proof of driving (actual physical control), the State dismissed all charges.

DUI DISMISSED – State v. Mr. C. (Phoenix Municipal Court No. 4404265): Mr. C. was stopped for allegedly having an obstructed plate. When the officer stopped him, he claimed Mr. C. had watery, bloodshot eyes and an odor of alcohol. During the eye test (HGN), Mr. C. exhibited 6 cues out of 6. After setting Mr. C.’s case to trial and filing three separate evidentiary motions regarding no reasonable suspicion for the stop, no probable cause for the arrest, and a violation of his right to counsel, the State dismissed all criminal charges. Following the dismissal on criminal charges, a separate civil traffic hearing was set. At the hearing, the officer requested not to proceed and Mr. C.’s civil charge was also dismissed.

DUI DISMISSED – State v. Mr. D. (DMC No. 7172) (Apache Junction Justice Court No. TR06-0019): Mr. D was seen by an officer travelling at a high rate of speed, when he suddenly hit his brakes and did a squealing tire U-Turn. He came to a stop in the middle of the road and the officer contacted him. He later arrested Mr. D for Reckless Driving and DUI Drugs (Suspected Stimulants). During the course of the case, the Pinal County Attorney’s Office violated Mr. D’s Speedy Trial Rights; we filed a Motion to Dismiss due to a Rule 8 Violation. The court granted our motion, and all charges have been dismissed.

DUI DISMISSED – State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 7291) (Glendale City Court No. TR06-26138): Mr. H. was involved in a single vehicle accident in which he struck a power pole in the City of Glendale. Paramedics had to forcibly remove him from the vehicle, and the officer assisted in holding him down while he was strapped to a back board and taken to the hospital. Although the officer observed no signs and symptoms of alcohol or drug impairment, he still requested a blood test from Mr. H. We filed a Motion to Suppress the results of the blood test due to a lack of Probable Cause to Invoke the Implied Consent Law. Although Mr. H. had a prior DUI, was currently on probation for a felony drug charge and had Methamphetamine in his blood test, the Judge still agreed with our motion and after an Evidentiary Hearing suppressed the result of his blood test. The Prosecution then moved to Dismiss All Charges.

DUI DISMISSED – State v. Mr. W. (Agua Fria Justice Court No. 2006-130904): Mr. W. was pulled over in Avondale during a DUI Task Force. Ultimately he was arrested for DUI and a BAC of .150 was obtained from a breath test. We attended the court dates and found that the State had not produced full discovery as required by law. We ultimately informed the State that they were violation and they were forced to move for a Motion to Dismiss. The State never could find all appropriate discovery, and the one year statute of limitations ran with all charges being dismissed forever.

DUI DISMISSED – State v. Mr. P. (West Mesa Justice Court No. TR-2006066028): Mr. W. had an accident in the center median after traveling too fast on County Club Drive. This was observed by a police officer. He subsequently contacted Mr. W. and performed Field Sobriety Tests on him. He was arrested for DUI and was given a breath test which revealed a .153 BAC. When we got involved in the case, we filed Motions to Dismiss based on the State’s violation of the timely discovery rules. Ultimately the State was forced to file their own Motion to Dismiss because they were violating Mr. P.’s speedy trial rights.

DUI DISMISSED – State v. Mr. S. (San Tan Justice Court No. TR-0651694CR): Mr. S. was seen pulled over on the U.S. 60 with his hazard lights on. When officers made contact they observed that his female passenger had vomited twice. They subsequently arrested Mr. S. for DUI and he provided a breath test of a .139 BAC. Due to the fact that the officer never saw Mr. S. actually driving, we filed a Motion to Dismiss for “lack of actual physical control.” Just prior to the Evidentiary Hearing, the State moved to dismiss all charges.

DUI DISMISSED – State v. Mr. E. (Mesa Municipal Court No. 2006059355): Mr. E. pulled up to a 7-11 store at 815 S. Dobson. Various people called police because they felt he was impaired. When officers arrived, he was seen exiting the 7-11 with a handgun tucked in his back pocket. Officers subsequently arrested him for DU and pulled the security footage showing him driving up to the 7-11. Once he was taken to the station he spoke to our attorney via telephone and then requested to have an independent blood test. The officers told him that they would deal with it down at the jail, and he was booked overnight. The jail staff never helped him secure an independent test, and we were able to file a Motion in which the judge dismissed all charges.

DUI DISMISSED – State v. Ms. P. (Mesa Municipal Court No. 2002025698): Ms. P. was pulled over for driving in the bike path and almost hitting a sidewalk. Upon being contacted by the officers, she admitted she’d had one drink and also had some prescription drugs in her system. She later wrote a letter to the judge apologizing for driving “impaired.” After we took over the case, we were able to show the prosecutor that the prescription drugs in her system were legal, and that they would be hard-pressed to beat us in a trial to convince a jury she was impaired by those drugs. The prosecutor then moved to dismiss all charges.

DWI DISMISSED – State v. Ms. S. (Hassayampa Justice Court No. TR-2006144957000): Ms. S. made a u-turn and clipped a curb, thereby causing a flat tire. She was driving 5 miles per hour to get a well-lit area when a cop pulled her over. The officer changed her tire for her and spoke with her for about 15 minutes. It suddenly dawned on him that he smelled an odor of alcohol, and he arrested her for DWI. While at the station, she attempted two breath tests: the first one failed and the second one revealed a .102 BAC. We were able to convince the prosecutor to subsequently dismiss the case based on the weakness of the State’s case.

DWI DISMISSED – State v. Ms. T. (Gilbert Municipal Court No. 06-TR25326DU): Ms. T. was stopped in the city of Gilbert for allegedly having a rear taillight and brakelight out on her vehicle. Upon contact with her, the officer claimed she had a yellowish coating on her tongue, along with some other signs and symptoms of drug impairment. A Drug Recognition Evaluation (DRE) was conducted and police came to the opinion that she was under the influence of cannabis and central nervous system depressants. Her results came back with the drug Citalopram in her system. We were able to show that she had a prescription for this drug, and that the drug was not impairing her ability to drive at the time police stopped her. Ultimately we convinced the prosecutor to dismiss all charges.

DWI DISMISSED – State v. Mr. R. (Mesa Municipal Court No. 2007-000702): Mr. R. was stopped during a DUI Task Force for making a wide right turn. Upon contact, officers detected an odor of alcohol. They noted he was not wearing a shirt, was also wearing socks with no shoes. Mr. R. indicated he had been changing his clothes while driving. We were subsequently able to show that the Field Sobriety Tests were affected by his clothing (or lack thereof), and that his blood reading was low. We then convinced the prosecutor to dismiss all charges.

Hassayampa Justice Court DWI DISMISSED – State v. Ms. S. (Hassayampa Justice Court No. TR-2006144957000): Ms. S. made a u-turn and clipped a curb, thereby causing a flat tire. She was driving 5 miles per hour to get a well-lit area when a cop pulled her over. The officer changed her tire for her and spoke with her for about 15 minutes. It suddenly dawned on him that he smelled an odor of alcohol, and he arrested her for DUI. While at the station, she attempted two breath tests: the first one failed and the second one revealed a .102 BAC. We were able to convince the prosecutor to subsequently dismiss the case based on the weakness of the State’s case.

(Gilbert Municipal Court No. 06-TR25326DU): Ms. T. was stopped in the city of Gilbert for allegedly having a rear taillight and brakelight out on her vehicle. Upon contact with her, the officer claimed she had a yellowish coating on her tongue, along with some other signs and symptoms of drug impairment. A Drug Recognition Evaluation (DRE) was conducted and police came to the opinion that she was under the influence of cannabis and central nervous system depressants. Her results came back with the drug Citalopram in her system. We were able to show that she had a prescription for this drug, and that the drug was not impairing her ability to drive at the time police stopped her. Ultimately we convinced the prosecutor to dismiss all charges.

(Mesa Municipal Court No. 2007-000702): Mr. R. was stopped during a DUI Task Force for making a wide right turn. Upon contact, officers detected an odor of alcohol. They noted he was not wearing a shirt, was also wearing socks with no shoes. Mr. R. indicated he had been changing his clothes while driving. We were subsequently able to show that the Field Sobriety Tests were affected by his clothing (or lack thereof), and that his blood reading was low. We then convinced the prosecutor to dismiss all charges.

(San Tan Justice Court No. TR2006-16338): Police received a potential burglary call in a neighborhood in the area of Guadalupe. Mr. S. was seen pulling out of a neighborhood, and was subsequently stopped. Police discovered he was not the burglary suspect but had an odor of alcohol, and they arrested him. He provided a .158 blood sample. We were able to file a Motion to Dismiss based on no reasonable suspicion to stop, which was granted and resulted in the entire case being dismissed.

(Gila County Justice Court No. 2000046252CR): Mr. C. was stopped by police in Globe, Arizona and subsequently charged with an alleged DUI and Possession of Marijuana. Because of unreasonable delays with the police department’s test of Mr. C.’s urine, we were able to get all charges dismissed.

(Phoenix Municipal Court No. 2833326CR): Mr. M. was stopped by City of Phoenix Police for an alleged DUI. He provided a .103 blood sample and requested to speak to his attorney. Because the police were going to release him, they did not comply with Mr. M.’s request. He was eventually released a couple of hours later. Because the police denied Mr. M.’s right to counsel, he could receive advice regarding obtaining an independent blood test for a hospital. Upon the filing of a Motion to Dismiss for Denial of Right to Counsel, the City of Phoenix Prosecutor’s Office dismissed all charges.

(Maricopa County Justice Court No. 02-07817CR): Mr. N. was stopped by Sheriff’s Deputies and investigated for DUI. After being arrested, he was taken to the station and provided a blood sample. Afterwards, he asked to be released to get an independent blood sample from a hospital. The officer violated Mr. N.’s rights by not releasing him to obtain an independent test. We subsequently filed a Motion to Dismiss and after a hearing on the Motion, the Judge dismissed Mr. N.’s charges.

(Mesa Municipal Court No. 2003014506CR): Mr. M. was stopped for an alleged DUI violation by Mesa Police. We were able to show that his driving was justifiable and not as a result of any alcohol consumed. Combined with the facts and his low BAC, we were able to have the City of Mesa Prosecutor’s Office dismiss all charges.

(Phoenix Municipal Court No. 2784578CR): Mr. P. was stopped by Phoenix Police for an alleged DWI violation. Although his breath alcohol content was a .108, we were able to demonstrate that the officer who stopped him denied Mr. P.’s right to counsel when he requested to speak to a lawyer. The State moved for several continuances in order to respond to the Motion, then after reviewing all of the facts the State moved to dismiss for factual deficiency.

(Maricopa County Justice Court No. 533668CR): Mr. G. was a minor charged with DWI and Possession of Drug Paraphernalia. Due to the fact that the arresting officer had been called out for military duty, we were able to enforce Mr. G.’s speedy trial rights prior to his 18th birthday. The State subsequently moved to dismiss all charges.

(Phoenix Municipal Court No. 8970876CR): Mr. H. was stopped or an alleged DUI in June. The City of Phoenix Prosecutor’s Office was unable to proceed to trial in October, and the case was dismissed. Sometime thereafter, the City Prosecutor’s Office re-filed the charges and sent notice to Mr. H.’ former address without notifying Defense Counsel. He eventually discovered there was a warrant regarding his DUI some six (6) years later. We then got the case dismissed in its entirety do to a violation of Mr. H.’s speedy trial rights.

(Buckeye Municipal Court No. 0210382CR): Mr. C. was stopped by Buckeye Police and he had an open container in his car. He subsequently provided a .120 breath alcohol sample. Because the stop appeared to be a “fishing expedition” by police, we filed a Motion to Dismiss based upon no reasonable suspicion. An evidentiary hearing was held, and the judge dismissed all charges.

(Phoenix Municipal Court No. 8978055CR): Mr. W. was riding his Harley Davidson motorcycle when he was engaged in an argument with his girlfriend. His motorcycle hit the gravel and “went down.” He subsequently was cited for DUI and provided a .110 blood sample which revealed a .110 BAC. At the trial in the City of Phoenix Court, the jury came back as a “hung jury.” The State decided they had “no reasonable likelihood of conviction at re-trial” and dismissed all charges.

(Tempe Municipal Court No. 03627814CR): Ms. S. was stopped by City of Tempe Police after an accident. They placed her under arrest for having an odor of alcohol. We were able to show that the low amount of alcohol in her system had no effect on her driving, and was not a factor in the accident. All charges were then dismissed by the prosecutor.

(Pima County Justice Court No. 02008989CR): Mr. M. was stopped by Pima County officers and cited for DUI/Drugs. The State’s test claimed that he had metabolites of Soma and Valium in his system. Upon retest by our expert, we showed that the nannograms of metabolite were “inactive” and so low that they were not affecting his ability to drive. The State dismissed all charges.

(Phoenix Municipal Court No. 2846389CR): Mr. W. was stopped by City of Phoenix Police, who claimed he was weaving in his lane. A warrant was subsequently obtained to draw Mr. W.’s blood, which revealed a .103 BAC. Mr. W. had asked to be released so he could get his own blood test at a hospital, but the police did not comply. We filed a Motion based upon the denial of his right to get an independent test, and the State moved to dismiss all charges.

(Chandler Municipal Court No. 01P856220CR): Mr. S. was stopped by Chandler City Police for an alleged DUI. He subsequently provided a .144 blood sample. Because it appeared that officers had stopped him simply because it was late at night and they were “trolling for DUI’s”, we filed a Motion based on No Reasonable Suspicion to Stop. This was reviewed by the City Prosecutor and they dismissed all charges.

(Peoria Municipal Court No. 0105878CR): Mr. P. was stopped by Arizona DPS for a minor traffic infraction. Subsequently, he was processed for DUI and he requested to call an attorney. We filed a Motion to Dismiss based upon denial of right to Counsel, and held an Evidentiary Hearing before the Peoria Justice of the Peace. The Judge ruled against us, but because the tape of the proceeding was lost, we were entitled to a “Trial De Novo” in the Superior Court. When the time for the trial came, the State was adequately prepared and the Superior Court Judge dismissed all charges.

(Phoenix Municipal Court No. 2805703CR): Mr. N. was pulled over by Phoenix Police for allegedly squealing his tires. A DUI investigation ensued and he submitted a .088 breath test. Initially, the City of Phoenix Prosecutor’s Office would not dismiss the charges or cut any lesser plea agreements. On the day of trial, the prosecutor realized how weak his case was and saw that we were fully prepared, and he then dismissed all charges.

(2002082664CR): Mr. B. was stopped for a minor traffic violation and subsequently submitted a .107 breath test. Because the officer did not use a certified checklist as required by the Department of Health Services, we filed a Motion and had his breath results suppressed. On the day of trial, the State dismissed all charges.

(South Mesa/Gilbert Justice Court No. 03-04139CR): Officers were called regarding a vehicle traveling erratically. Mr. M. was seen making a wide turn without using a turn signal. After he was stopped, he stated he’d had 1 beer, and he was subsequently arrested. He asked to speak with a lawyer, and he refused to answer the officer’s questions. Because his breath test was below the legal limit, in compass with the exaggeration by the officers, we were able to convince the prosecutor to dismiss all charges.

(Glendale Municipal Court No. 2001025213CR): Mr. A. was stopped while at a checkpoint on a military base. A strong odor of alcohol was noticed, and he was handcuffed until police could arrive. He subsequently stated that he wanted to talk to a lawyer. Due to the State having problems securing interviews for the defense of the military witnesses, we were able to threaten a Motion to Preclude these witnesses, which resulted in the State dismissing all charges.

(Phoenix Municipal Court No. 654495CR): Mr. J. was involved in a single car accident approximately 6 years prior to hiring us. Because he had moved, the Summons never reached him and a Bench Warrant was issued for his arrest. He was subsequently arrested when he returned to Arizona, and hired us to fight his case. We filed a Motion to Dismiss based upon lack of Corpus Delecti, and the State ultimately agreed and all charges were dismissed.

(Apache Junction Justice Court No. 2002-3418CR): Mr. W. was stopped by an officer who claimed someone had called in and said his vehicle had crossed the middle line. He was then arrested and taken to a station, where he attempted to provide a breath sample two times. The officer stated that his breath machine was “broken” and that, “I don’t want to drive to Florence.” Due to the problems with Discovery and the officer, the court dismissed the case shortly after the filing of our Notice of Appearance and Request for Discovery.

(West Mesa Justice Court No. 02-8625CR): Mr. B. was accused of recklessly changing lanes and traveling at a high rate of speed. He performed Field Sobriety Tests and provided a .104 breath BAC. Due to various problems with the filing of discovery paperwork by the officer, the judge terminated prosecution shortly after our filing of a Notice of Appearance.

(Chandler Justice Court No. 03-00376CR): Mr. D. was involved in a single vehicle accident. When officers arrived 15 minutes later, he admitted to drinking at a bar. He performed Field Sobriety Tests, and was then arrested. He ultimately provided a breath BAC of .133%. Due to the failure of a witness to consent to a defense interview, we filed a Motion to Preclude his testimony. That Motion was granted, and the charges were dismissed.

(Scottsdale Justice Court No. 529008CR): Ms. K. was backing out of a parking space with her two roommates, when an officer walked up and stopped her. The officer said, “Ma’am, I’m doing random checks.” Subsequently she was arrested for DUI and provided a .098% breath alcohol sample. We informed the prosecutor we would be filing a Motion to Dismiss for No Reasonable Suspicion to Stop, and he agreed with our assessment and dismissed all charges.

(Phoenix Municipal Court No. 2839891CR): Mr. A. was stopped for allegedly making a left-hand turn in an improper position. He subsequently performed Field Sobriety Tests, and was arrested. He asked to call an attorney, and he was allowed to do so. He then submitted to a breath test, which resulted in a .124% BAC. The officer failed to adequately watch Mr. R. during the “deprivation period” which occurs immediately prior to the breath test. We filed a Motion to Suppress the reading, and after an Evidentiary Hearing, that motion was granted. The State was then forced to dismiss all charges.

(Northeast Phoenix Justice Court No. 03-02903CR): Mr. D. was stopped for allegedly traveling 78 mph on the freeway. After he was stopped, only partial Field Sobriety Tests were done by the officer. Mr. D. provided a breath sample which resulted in a .111 BAC. Because the State was failing to timely provided discovery, we filed a Motion to Preclude Witness Testimony and Breath Test Results. The State ultimately conceded, and all charges were dismissed.

(Northeast Phoenix Justice Court No. 03-03302CR): Mr. D. was stopped for going 79 in a 65 mph zone. Upon contact by police, they noted an odor of alcohol and the “fly” of his pants was down. He asked for an attorney, and called our office. After speaking with one of our attorneys, he asked about an independent blood test. The officer told him he did not need one, because there was a second vial drawn for his use. We filed a Motion for interference with his right to counsel, given the fact that the officer talked our client out of asking to be released for an independent blood draw at the hospital. An Evidentiary Hearing was held, and the judge granted the motion, resulting in a dismissal of all charges.

(Phoenix Municipal Court No. 2917580CR): Ms. R. was stopped by police for allegedly making a “short left turn” and almost striking some of the “raised buttons on the roadway.” She performed well on Field Sobriety Tests. Although she submitted to a breath test which was over the legal limit, we were able to convince the prosecutor to dismiss the DUI charges.

(Scottsdale Municipal Court No. 2003-12905CR): Mr. T. was stopped for allegedly weaving and making an improper right hand turn. Upon contact, he smelled of alcohol and he stated to the officer, “When do I get to talk to my lawyer?” The officers did not allow him to speak to a lawyer before he submitted to a blood test, which resulted in a .155% BAC. We filed a Denial of Right to Counsel Motion, which was granted by the judge at an Evidentiary Hearing, resulting in a dismissal of all charges.

(Chandler Municipal Court No. 03-C-2047691CR): Mr. L. was involved in a single vehicle accident, and when police arrived he was found 200 yards away from his vehicle, walking. We filed a Corpus Delecti Motion, which the judge granted, and we were able to suppress all statements. Because of this motion, the State dismissed all charges.

(Mesa Municipal Court No. 2003052360CR): Mr. P. was stopped for allegedly weaving, and he stated that he’d drunk two 16-oz. beers. Although he was 62 years old, he still performed fairly well on the Field Sobriety Tests. He provided a low blood BAC sample, and we were able to convince the prosecutor to dismiss the DUI charge.

(Chandler Municipal Court No. 03-C-2215542CR): Mr. V. was involved in an alleged hit and run accident, and was under 21 years of age with alcohol in his system. He was subsequently stopped by police and provided a blood sample. Due to various problems identifying Mr. B. as the driver, we were able to convince the prosecutor to dismiss the DUI charge and offer a plea of Minor Driving with Alcohol in Body.

(South Mesa/Gilbert Justice Court No. 03-09845CR): Mr. G. was stopped by Gilbert Police for allegedly speeding. Upon contact, the officer claimed he had an odor of alcohol and was traveling at 80 mph in a 65 mph zone. Mr. G. submitted to a breath test, which resulted in a low BAC, yet the officer stated that he performed poorly on Field Sobriety Tests. Due to the facts of the case and our threat of trial, we were able to dismiss the prosecutor to dismiss the DUI charges.

(East Mesa Justice Court No. 03-04769CR): Ms. K. was pulled over for only having one headlight on, and traveling 80 mph on the freeway. Upon contact with the officer, she performed moderately okay on Field Sobriety Tests, and produced a .147% BAC. Because the State was having trouble convincing witnesses to appear for defense interviews, we were able to file a Motion to Preclude their testimony. The State was then forced to dismiss all charges.

(Glendale Municipal Court No. 2003016696CR): Mr. M. was stopped for allegedly making an improper turn. The officer noted a strong odor of alcohol upon contact, and he admitted to drinking. A subsequent breath test revealed a .257% BAC. Due to the fact that the officer was not cooperating with our interview requests, we filed a Motion to Preclude his testimony, which the judge granted. The State was then forced to dismiss all charges.

(Peoria Justice Court No. 02-08356CR): Mr. M. was stopped for traveling 96 mph on the freeway. Upon contact by the officer, he admitted to having some drinks, and told the officer he had “lower back problems.” He did not perform well on the Field Sobriety Tests, and was above the legal limit on his preliminary breath test (PBT). We were able to show that the officer changed the time on the traffic complaint regarding the traffic stop in order to move Mr. M’.s breath test to within 2 hours of the stop. Based on this and Mr. M.’s low blood alcohol reading, and we were able to convince the State to dismiss the DUI charges.

(East Mesa Justice Court No. 03-06538CR): Mr. Z. was stopped for traveling 35 in a 50 mph zone. He was also weaving. When officers contacted him, they noted he was obese and he stated he had 3 beers. He also told the officers he had diabetes. We were able to point out that impairment the officer was witnessing was due to a blood sugar dip. Due to Mr. Z.’s condition, we were able to have the State dismiss the DUI charges.

(Phoenix Municipal Court No. 2966630CR): Ms. K. was stopped for driving 51 in a 40 mph zone. She admitted to having 2-3 beers, and submitted to Field Sobriety Tests. After she was transported to the police station, she provided a reading above the legal limit. We were able to point out that the calibration checks on the breath testing device showed that the machine was reading somewhat high. That, combined with her performance on Field Sobriety Tests allowed us to convince the prosecutor to dismiss the DUI.

(Phoenix Municipal Court No. 2970478CR): Ms. J. was seen by the side of the road as an officer was driving by. The officer indicated that the area had a high number of burglaries. When he pulled back around, he saw Ms. J. pulling away in her car and he stopped her. She performed well on Field Sobriety Tests, and provided a breath sample above the legal limit. Due to the questionable stop and her performance on FST’s, we were able to get the prosecutor to dismiss the DUI charge.

(Scottsdale Municipal Court 2003-23821CR): Mr. S. was stopped for allegedly weaving within his lane. He had three friends in the car with him, and he indicated he had been distracted. He performed well on Field Sobriety Tests, yet was still arrested. Due to his low BAC and the fact we would have good arguments at trial, the State agreed to dismiss the DUI charge.

(Buckeye Justice Court No. 03-06385CR): Mr. S. had a prior DUI and had been stopped for allegedly drinking from an open container. After performing Field Sobriety Tests, he was arrested. While at the station, Mr. S. asked to call a lawyer and the officer told him he could not talk to a lawyer until after he provided a blood sample. His BAC came at .156%. We filed a Motion for Denial of Right to Counsel, and after an Evidentiary Hearing the judge dismissed the DUI, saving Mr. S. months in jail.

(Phoenix Municipal Court No. 2972842CR): Ms. W. was stopped for allegedly traveling 25 mph in a 40 mph zone. Although she did not perform well on Field Sobriety Tests, she was offered a breath test by the officer. The breath test resulted in an “interferent detected/no viable readings obtained.” We convinced the prosecutor that the reading would be suppressed, and the DUI was dismissed.

(Scottsdale Municipal Court No. 1577232CR): Mr. T. was stopped by City of Scottsdale Police for an alleged wide right turn and a license plate light being out. We were able to explain that Mr. T.’s wide right turn was due to the fact that he had two female passengers in his car. In addition, he did quite well on Field Sobriety Tests. This resulted in his DUI being dismissed.

(Phoenix Municipal Court No. 2978701CR): Mr. W. was seen driving without rear lights on his vehicle. He was stopped by police, and a DUI investigation ensued. He did very well on his FST’s, and no eye (HGN) was given. Even though his BAC was above the legal limit, we were able to get all charges dismissed.

(Phoenix Municipal Court No. 13177634CR): Two Phoenix Police Officers pulled up next to Mr. K. when they were on their motorcycles, and noticed he had a “stuperous look on his face.” After the light changed and he began to drive, the officers pulled him over and began a DUI investigation. His BAC came back at .119%. We filed a Motion to Dismiss based on no Reasonable Suspicion to Stop, and an Evidentiary Hearing was held in which the judge threw out the case.

(Mesa Municipal Court No. 2003075844CR): Mr. R. was stopped for allegedly making a wide right turn. When the officer stopped him, he claimed he had watery, bloodshot eyes and an odor of alcohol. During the eye test (HGN), Mr. R. exhibited only 4 cues out of 6, and he had a knee injury. Due to the fact that he had a low BAC, combined with our arguments to the prosecutor about his good performance on the remaining FST’s, the State dismissed all charges.

(Mesa Municipal Court No. 2003079934CR): Ms. B. was stopped for allegedly making a wide right turn.  The Mesa Police Officer who stopped her claimed she had slurred speech and bloodshot, watery eyes.  On the eye test (HGN), she exhibited only 4 cues.  She tried to explain that she had a broken toe and took medication for asthma, which may affect her eyes, yet she was still arrested for DUI.  Due to her low BAC, combined with the medical records we provided to the prosecutor, we were able to have all charges dismissed.