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 charged with a DUI offense that was a third offense occurring within 10 years of a felony. As a result, client was facing mandatory jail time, a 10 year loss of license, and the potential of a felony conviction. Mr. Sullivan negotiated with the state in a way that resulted in a plea that was not a felony, only a 6 month loss of license and no jail time whatsoever.
Our client was involved in a traffic accident in which he was alleged to have left the scene of an accident. A subsequent investigation led to our client’s arrest for DUI. He provided breath alcohol samples with results of .13/.12. Mr. Sullivan performed a thorough analysis of the Intoxilyzer. Due in part to some of the problems Mr. Sullivan found with the machine, the State agreed to reduce the DUI to Reckless Driving.
Our client was stopped for speeding on 4th Street in St. Petersburg in an area where the speed limit had just changed. She declined breath testing and field sobriety testing, This was a second offense DUI arrest. The State agreed to reduce the charge from DUI to Reckless Driving.
Our client was stopped for speeding on 4th Street in St. Petersburg in an area where the speed limit had just changed. She declined breath testing and field sobriety testing, This was a second offense DUI arrest. The State agreed to reduce the charge from DUI to Reckless Driving.
Our client was stopped for a traffic infraction. He exhibited some indicators of impairment and performed moderately on FSE’s. He declined to submit to breath testing and field sobriety tests. Mr. Sullivan presented mitigation to the State Attorney’s Office and they ultimately agreed to reduce the charge to Reckless Driving.
Our client was involved in a minor traffic accident. Subsequent to the crash investigation, law enforcement conducted a DUI investigation for which our client was ultimately arrested. He submitted to breath testing, which revealed results that were above the enhancement level of .15. Mr. Sullivan presented a scientific argument demonstrating what our client’s blood alcohol level would have been at the time of the accident and the State agreed to reduce the charge.
Our client was stopped after law enforcement observed her “tailgating” another motorist near the beach. The deputy noticed an odor of alcohol and elected to conduct a DUI investigation. Our client refused field sobriety exercises and breath testing. Mr. Sullivan presented a mitigation packet and the State agreed to reduce the charge to Reckless Driving.
Client was involved in a minor traffic accident. Following a DUI investigation and arrest, she provided breath results which were .21 and .20. Her primary objective was to avoid a requirement that she install an ignition interlock in her device. Through various scientific arguments, Mr. Sullivan was able to convince the State Attorney that her breath alcohol level would have been .14 or less at the time of driving.
Client was pulled over for speeding. He performed above-average on FSE’s and submitted to breath testing. He also submitted to urine testing that showed the presence of a controlled substance. Mr. Sullivan presented mitigation to the State and they agreed to reduce the charge from DUI to Reckless Driving.
Client was pulled over for weaving on his motorcycle. Client was a CDL holder, so a conviction for DUI would disrupt his livelihood. Client performed slightly below average on FSE’s and submitted a breath result that was .13. Mr. Sullivan submitted a mitigation packet to the state attorney outlining problems with the case as well as the disproportionate effects that a DUI conviction would have on our client. Based upon this thorough analysis, the State agreed to reduce the charge to Reckless Driving.
Client was involved in a minor traffic accident. Law enforcement responded and suspected that the client was impaired. She was placed under arrest and subsequent to arrest she provided breath results of .000. She then provided urine that showed the presence of certain prescription medications. Mr. Sullivan found many problems with the case and presented that to the State. The State agreed to reduce the charges with no probation or classes, and no conviction. This means that the client is now eligible to pursue a sealing of the official government records.
Defendant was involved in a minor rear-end collisioin for which he was determined to be at fault. Law enforcement arrived on the scene and elected to conduct a DUI investigation after observing what they believed to be indicators of impairment. The client declined to submit to field sobriety tests, and subsequently declined to submit to breath testing. The Defendant was arrested for DUI, making this the client’s second DUI arrest. Mr. Sullivan presented mitigation to the State and they agreed to reduce the charges from DUI to Reckless Driving.
