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.
Our client was involved in a traffic crash, and when law enforcement responded, they observed indicators of impairment and suspected the defendant was under the influence of drugs. The client provided a breath result of 0.000 and submitted to urine testing. Mr. Sullivan submitted correspondence to the State outlining factual issues with the DUI charge. The State agreed to reduce the charge to careless driving with a withhold of adjudication.
The defendant was stopped by law enforcement for driving too fast around a turn, screeching tires, and operating the vehicle without headlights. The defendant performed poorly on field sobriety exercises and admitted to consuming wine prior to driving. The defendant provided a breath result of 0.149. Mr. Sullivan submitted correspondence to the State outlining mitigating factors and issues with the breath-testing machine, and the State Attorney’s Office agreed to amend the charge from DUI to reckless driving.
The defendant was stopped for driving without headlights. Following the stop, law enforcement alleged signs of intoxication, including bloodshot, watery, glassy eyes, droopy eyelids, and the odor of alcohol. The defendant performed poorly on field sobriety exercises and provided breath results of 0.12 and 0.12 after the arrest. Mr. Sullivan submitted persuasive correspondence to the State, and the State agreed to amend the charge from DUI to reckless driving.
The defendant was involved in a rear-end collision and was determined to be at fault. When law enforcement responded to the scene, officers observed what they claimed were classic signs of impairment and believed the defendant was under the influence of drugs. The defendant submitted to both breath and urine testing. Mr. Sullivan prepared correspondence to the State outlining several factual issues, and the State ultimately dismissed the charge.
The defendant was stopped for having an expired registration. During the stop, law enforcement observed indicators of impairment, including the odor of alcohol, bloodshot and watery eyes, glassy eyes, and poor balance. The defendant performed poorly on field sobriety exercises and submitted to breath testing, with results of 0.12 and 0.11. Mr. Sullivan presented persuasive correspondence outlining significant mitigation, and the State agreed to reduce the charge from DUI to reckless driving.
