DUI Category Archives — Tampa Criminal Lawyer Blog Published by Tampa Criminal Attorney

Florida Court Assesses Double Jeopardy Violations

Posted In: January 28, 2025 | By Hanlon Law, PA

In Florida, people are protected against being convicted more than once for the same offense, as it violates their right against double jeopardy. While in some cases, it is clear that multiple convictions violate double jeopardy, in others, it is less so, as illustrated in a recent Florida ruling involving DUI manslaughter and vehicular homicide convictions. If you are charged with a crime, it is smart to speak to an experienced Tampa criminal defense lawyer about what you can do to safeguard your rights.

History of the Case

It is reported that the defendant was charged and convicted of multiple offenses, including DUI manslaughter and vehicular homicide, stemming from a single-car accident that resulted in a fatality. Allegedly, the defendant was driving under the influence of alcohol when he lost control of the vehicle, causing a crash that killed his passenger. The State charged the defendant with DUI manslaughter under Florida Statutes § 316.193 and vehicular homicide under § 782.071, among other offenses.

Reportedly, the defendant pled guilty to these charges and received concurrent sentences for the convictions. However, following sentencing, he filed a motion to withdraw his plea, arguing that his trial counsel failed to inform him of a double jeopardy violation arising from convictions for both offenses related to the same death. He also challenged fines, costs, and probation conditions imposed during sentencing, asserting errors in their statutory basis and applicability. Continue Reading ›

Florida Court Examines Grounds for Conducting a DUI Investigation

Posted In: November 24, 2023 | By Hanlon Law, PA

It is not uncommon for people to be charged with DUI crimes following alcohol-induced crashes. While the police are permitted to investigate collisions without warrants, it is not always clear what constitutes a crash and, therefore, grounds for conducting an investigation. In a recent Florida opinion, a court clarified what is considered a crash for the purposes of DUI investigations in a case in which it ultimately determined the defendant’s arrest was lawful. If you are charged with a DUI crime, it is in your best interest to talk to a Tampa DUI defense lawyer to evaluate what steps you can take to protect your interests.

Factual and Procedural History

It is reported that a police officer responded to a report of a traffic crash and found the defendant’s overturned pickup truck in a ditch. The defendant, standing nearby, exhibited signs of alcohol impairment. Despite no evidence of the truck colliding with another vehicle or structure, the officer initiated a DUI investigation. The defendant’s truck, which was damaged with a broken headlight, was towed, during which it was revealed it contained numerous alcohol containers. The officer subsequently arrested the defendant for DUI. Chemical testing revealed his BAC to be over .15.

Allegedly, the defendant moved to suppress the results of his chemical testing and any evidence obtained during the investigation, arguing that his overturned truck did not constitute a crash and, therefore, his arrest was invalid. The court granted his motion, and the state appealed. Continue Reading ›

Florida Court Explains Grounds for Suppressing Evidence in Criminal Trials

Posted In: August 28, 2023 | By Hanlon Law, PA

In Florida, most DUI arrests arise out of traffic stops. The police generally must have reasonable suspicion that a motorist is committing a crime or violating a traffic law in order to lawfully stop them, however, and if they do not, any evidence obtained during the stop arguably should be deemed inadmissible. In a recent Florida DUI case, the court discussed the grounds for granting and sustaining a motion to suppress evidence gathered during a traffic stop. If you are charged with a DUI offense, it is advisable to talk to a Tampa DUI defense attorney about what defenses you may be able to assert.

Facts of the Case and Procedural Setting

It is alleged that an officer, equipped with over 17 years of experience as a DUI enforcement officer, observed the defendant’s vehicle driving 83 miles per hour in a zone with a speed limit of 35 miles per hour. The officer initiated a traffic stop after the defendant abruptly came to a halt in a turn lane rather than gradually slowing down. Upon approaching the vehicle, the officer detected a strong odor of alcohol emanating from it and noticed a half-filled cup of liquid on the floorboard behind the passenger seat. The officer also observed that the defendant had bloodshot and watery eyes and slurred speech.

Florida Court Holds Consent to Field Sobriety Exercises is Not Required in DUI Cases

Posted In: May 26, 2023 | By Hanlon Law, PA

In Florida, most DUI arrests arise out of traffic stops. While the police are permitted to investigate DUI crimes, they can only do so if they have reasonable suspicion that such crimes are being committed. They do not need to obtain consent from a DUI suspect to conduct field sobriety exercises, though, as demonstrated in a recent Florida case in which the court rejected the defendant’s argument that evidence obtained during his traffic stop should be suppressed. If you are accused of a DUI offense in Tampa, it is wise to speak to a Tampa DUI defense attorney as soon as possible.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is reported that, during a traffic stop, the officers suspected the defendant of DUI and directed him to perform field sobriety exercises. The defendant complied with their request but later moved to suppress the evidence of his performance on the field sobriety exercises, arguing that his consent was lacking and, therefore, the evidence violated the Fourth Amendment.

Allegedly, during the trial court’s hearing on the defendant’s motion, the court found that although there was reasonable suspicion of DUI, the defendant did not voluntarily consent to the field sobriety exercises. Consequently, the court granted the motion to suppress the evidence. The state appealed. Continue Reading ›

Florida Court Discusses the Rights of DUI Defendants

Posted In: December 30, 2021 | By Hanlon Law, PA

In most DUI cases, the State will rely on the results of chemical testing to determine whether or not the defendant is guilty. Despite the fact that Florida’s implied consent legislation requires all motorists accused of DUI to consent to breath or urine testing, police must acquire warrants to conduct blood tests unless there are extenuating circumstances. If a person is forced to take a blood test without a warrant, the test may be considered an unreasonable search, and the findings may be inadmissible. The considerations considered in deciding whether the police conducted an unconstitutional blood test were discussed in a recent Florida judgment coming from a DUI prosecution. If you’ve been charged with a DUI, it’s a good idea to consult with a skilled Florida DUI defense attorney about your options.

The Subject Arrest

According to reports, the defendant was involved in a car accident. When officers arrived at the site of the accident, they suspected the defendant of being inebriated and asked her to submit to field sobriety tests. She performed poorly on the tests and claimed to have a knee issue. She admitted to drinking rum and coke earlier in the day when questioned if she had consumed alcohol.

The police allegedly took the defendant to a hospital and demanded that she give a blood sample. On two instances, she declined the request. After determining that a passenger in the other vehicle involved in the crash died as a result of his injuries, the investigating officer ordered an involuntary blood sample, which revealed that the defendant’s blood alcohol content (BAC) was 0.13 percent three hours after the accident. The defendant was charged with DUI manslaughter and filed a motion to suppress the blood test results prior to her trial. She appealed after the court dismissed her request and the jury returned a guilty judgment. Continue Reading ›

Florida Court Explains What Evidence is Needed to Prove DUI Manslaughter

Posted In: November 27, 2021 | By Hanlon Law, PA

DUI manslaughter charges are frequently filed against people who drive recklessly while inebriated and cause the death of another person. Further, such charges may be brought even if it is not immediately evident that drunk driving caused the collision and consequent loss of life. In such cases, a DUI defendant may be able to argue that the prosecution has not shown enough evidence to prove guilt. In a recent Florida decision, the court considered what evidence the state needs present to prove that a motorist was driving while intoxicated and caused a fatal accident. If you’ve been charged with DUI manslaughter, it is wise to speak to a knowledgeable Florida DUI defense attorney about your possible defenses.

The Facts of the Case

According to reports, the defendant was traveling on the back of his ATV with his son. They were traveling on a country road with poor visibility and no shoulder. The ATV tipped over into a ditch at 9:00 p.m. The defendant was able to return the ATV to the road, and he and his son climbed on and attempted to start it. Witnesses nearby attempted to warn a truck approaching the ATV to slow down and encourage the defendant and his son to get off of the road.

It is alleged that a truck collided with the ATV, killing the defendant’s child and seriously wounding the defendant, who was flown to the hospital. The defendant admitted to drinking, and a blood test revealed that his blood alcohol concentration (BAC) was. 16. After a trial, he was found guilty of DUI manslaughter. He filed an appeal, claiming that the State had failed to present enough evidence to prove his guilt. Continue Reading ›

DUI Charges: What Happens If You Refuse a Breath Test in Florida?

Posted In: February 19, 2020 | By Hanlon Law, PA

In Florida, drivers suspected of intoxicated driving have a legal duty to submit to a breath test. Should you violate this obligation, you could lose your license. Indeed, a DUI refusal can lead to immediate penalties—even if you are not actually intoxicated. In this article, our Tampa DUI defense attorney explains the most important things you need to know about Florida law and breathalyzer refusals.

Implied Consent in Florida: Breathalyzer Tests

As a starting point, all drivers should know that Florida has an implied consent law on its books (Florida Statutes § 316.1939). Any person who operates a motor vehicle in the state has, by law, already consented to submit to a breathalyzer test if they are arrested for drunk driving. If you refuse to submit to the test, you will be subject to an immediate license suspension.

Florida Court Rules that the Identity of the Defendant is not Necessary to Establish the Commission of a DUI

Posted In: March 20, 2019 | By Hanlon Law, PA

It is axiomatic that the State cannot convict a person of a DUI based on suspicion alone. In other words, if the State lacks concrete evidence that a DUI has been committed, a defendant cannot be found guilty of DUI.

Recently, a Florida appellate court analyzed whether the identity of a DUI defendant is necessary to establish that a DUI has been committed. If you are a Tampa resident and are charged with a DUI or another crime, it is essential to retain a capable Tampa criminal defense attorney to assist you in protecting your rights.

Alleged Facts Regarding the Defendant’s DUI

Allegedly, a police officer observed a black SUV swerving through traffic at a speed that was twenty miles an hour over the posted speed limit. The officer observed the driver of the vehicle when it traveled past him, and noted that she was wearing a pink shirt and had long hair. The officer activated his emergency lights and sirens, and the driver increased her speed. The officer watched the vehicle run a red light and strike a valve box on the side of the road, after which he ended his pursuit.

Florida Court Reverses Sentence Based on Improper Scoring of Prior Crimes

Posted In: December 26, 2018 | By Hanlon Law, PA

In each criminal case, the defendant must choose which plea to enter, and in some cases it is prudent for a defendant to enter a guilty plea. Even if a defendant waives his or her right to a trial by conceding guilt, however, he or she is still afforded certain rights with regard to sentencing.

A district court in Florida recently vacated a sentence in a DUI case and remanded the case for resentencing, due to an error made by the trial court in the evidence considered in sentencing the defendant. If you are a Tampa resident charged with a crime, it is important to retain an experienced attorney who can assist you in trying to prevent the state from introducing any prohibited evidence against you.

Charges and Sentencing

Reportedly, the defendant was charged with DUI manslaughter following a fatal crash and entered an open guilty plea. During the defendant’s sentencing, the sentencing scoresheet submitted listed eleven prior offenses, each of which occurred in or before 1999. The total points for the defendant’s prior record, as indicated by the scoresheet, was 9.4. The trial court sentenced the defendant to 132 months’ imprisonment, with a mandatory four year sentence, to be followed by two years of community control and two years of probation. The defendant subsequently appealed. On appeal, the defendant argued that none of the prior offenses on his sentencing scoresheet should have been listed due to the age of the offense.

Supreme Court Backs Privacy for Cell Phone Users

Posted In: June 18, 2018 | By Hanlon Law, PA

The U.S. Supreme court recently bolstered personal privacy protections for anyone who owns a cell phone. The court’s new 5-4 ruling also clarifies some important safeguards for anyone facing Florida criminal charges (or elsewhere). The justices said that law enforcement officers generally need a warrant before they can obtain and search records showing when and where calls take place.“Although such records are generated for commercial purposes, that distinction does not negate [Defendant]’s anticipation of privacy in his physical location,” the court said in a majority opinion penned by Chief Justice John Roberts. “Mapping a cell phone’s location over the course of 127 days provides an all-encompassing record of the holder’s whereabouts.”

Defendant was charged with six counts of robbery and another six firearms offenses for his alleged role as the leader of a string of robberies. Prosecutors used cell tower records—showing Defendant’s whereabouts over the span of 127 days—to try to show that Defendant was in the area where the crimes happened when the crimes happened. A trial judge allowed the prosecutors to enter the cell tower data as evidence, and Defendant was later convicted. A federal appeals court affirmed the decision.