Columbia County Driver Pleas to DUI Charge Without Increased Penalties
A Florida Highway Patrol Trooper was dispatched to the area near mile marker 421 on Interstate 75. Upon his arrival, he observed a vehicle stuck in a ditch facing northwest. The driver was helped out of the vehicle by EMS personnel and checked out in the ambulance.
At the conclusion of his crash investigation, the Trooper moved in a criminal investigation for driving under the influence. The Trooper stated he observed bloodshot eyes, that the driver’s speech was slurred, and also smelled an odor of alcohol coming from the driver. The Trooper then asked the driver if she would perform field sobriety exercise. Ultimately, the driver agreed to perform the exercise.
The first test the Trooper performed was the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus test. He stated he observed a lack of smooth pursuit, distinct and sustained nystagmus prior to the onset of 45 degrees and at maximum deviation. The Trooper also noted that he observed all eight (8) clues on the walk and turn test and three (3) out of the four (4) clues on the one leg stand test.
The driver was placed under arrest for driving under the influence and transported to the Columbia County Jail to provide a breath sample. Upon arrival at the jail, the Trooper requested the driver provide a sample of her breath, which the driver agreed to. She blew 0.381 and 0.384. The driver received a DUI citation and her license was suspended for an unlawful breath alcohol sample.
The driver hired Meldon Law. The attorneys at Meldon Law found that the dry gas cylinder on the breath test instrument had expired and did not comply with Florida Administrative Code 11D-8. The attorney was able to then negotiate a plea to a DUI charge without the increased penalties for having a BAC over 0.150.
Did you receive a DUI? Call Meldon Law at (352) 373-8000 for help with your case, or write to us using our online contact form.
DISCLAIMER: The results are specific to the facts and legal circumstances of each of the clients’ cases and should not be used to form an expectation that the same results could be obtained for other clients in similar matters without reference to the specific factual and legal circumstances of each client’s case. (Date of Arrest: August 17, 2018).