Our case studies provide a closer look at how we’ve helped clients navigate challenging DUI charges and achieve favorable outcomes. While every case is different, these examples highlight our strategic approach, dedication, and commitment to protecting our clients’ rights and futures.
Client was stopped for making an improper left turn in a golf cart. The client performed poorly on FSE’s and subsequently provided a breath alcohol test with results that were .19. Mr. Sullivan pointed out a number of legal and factual issues with the case, and the State agreed to amend the charge from DUI to Reckless Driving.
Client was stopped for speeding and failure to maintain a single lane. He performed fairly on FSE’s and was arrested for DUI. Marijuana and paraphernalia were found in the car. Subsequent urine testing revealed the presence of THC in urine. Mr. Sullivan presented mitigation on all matters and the State agreed to reduce the DUI offense to Reckless Driving.
Client was detained after the police found her “passed out” behind the wheel. The client refused a blood test. Mr. Sullivan pointed out significant legal issues with the case. The state agreed to a reduction to reckless driving with a withhold of adjudication. The client will be eligible to seal her record.
Client was stopped for weaving when pulling into his own driveway. Client was of advanced age was asked to do field sobriety exercises that were inappropriate for someone of his age. Client refused breath testing. Mr. Sullivan presented mitigation and the State agreed to amend the DUI offense to a Reckless Driving.
Client was stopped for traveling in excess of 100 mph. Law enforcement noticed signs of impairment. Client performed poorly on FSE’s and refused a breath test. Mr. Sullivan was able to point out weaknesses in the State’s case, including the fact that due to the client’s weight, the officers should not have had him perform the standardized field sobriety tests. In order to avoid a trial, the State agreed to a reduction to Reckless Driving.
Client was charged with a 4th offense DUI. Client had visited several other lawyers who advised him it was in his best interests to plea to avoid a lengthy jail sentence. Had he followed that advice, he would have lost his license for life. Mr. Sullivan took on the case with the strategy of litigating the case in an effort of avoiding a DUI conviction. Mr. Sullivan located several key issues with the case, including the failure of law enforcement to conduct a Drug Recognition Evaluation. After being presented with the problems with the case, the State agreed to reduce the charge to Reckless Driving and the client never lost his license.
Client was found “passed out” at a gas pump. He was outside of his vehicle when law enforcement arrived. Mr. Sullivan filed a motion challenging the legality of the arrest. Shortly before the hearing, the State agreed to reduce the charge to Reckless Driving.
Client was stopped for speeding. She performed phenomenally on field sobriety exercises and declined breath testing. Mr. Sullivan provided persuasive correspondence to the State outlining the issues that the State would have at trial. The State agreed to reduce the charge to the non-criminal infraction of Careless Driving.
Client allegedly fled from a traffic stop. A DUI investigation ensued thereafter and he was arrested for DUI. The client refused a breath test. Although the State was resistant to reducing the charge, Mr. Sullivan provided a bullet point list of all of the evidence that was either in conflict or missing and the State agreed to reduce the charge to Reckless Driving.
Client was stopped for speeding and performed poorly on FSE’s. Her breath result was .08. Mr. Sullivan was able to demonstrate that her breath would have been lower at the time of driving (rising blood alcohol defense) and the State agreed to reduce the charge to Reckless Driving.
Client was stopped for making a U-turn at a red light. She performed fair on FSE’s and provided a breath result of .12. Mr. Sullivan submitted a mitigation packet to the State Attorney outlining the weaknesses of the State’s case and additional information regarding client’s background and character. The State agreed to reduce the charge to Reckless Driving
Client was involved in an accident for which she was at fault. She allegedly performed poorly on FSE’s and refused breath, but no video was preserved by the State. Mr. Sullivan pointed to the policy agency’s policy’s and was able to demonstrate that they violated their own policies by not taking video. The State thereafter agreed to reduce the charge to Reckless Driving.
