Recent Case Successes

Accident - .157 Blow and License Suspended At The Time

K.M.was arrested by the Lincolnwood Police Department after rear ending another vehicle and causing a 3 car accident while his driver's license was suspended for moving violations. He blew a 0.157. The State's attorney said I didn't have a chance to win especially with the judge who was presiding that day. After filing a pre-trial motion to quash arrest, the Judge believed my position that although the State had probable cause to arrest K.M. for Driving While Suspended, they did not have probable cause to arrest K.M for DUI and suppressed the breath test. The State knew it would lose the DUI and dismissed it. Since K.M had now had valid driving privileges and had cleared up his driver's license, that misdemeanor citation was dismissed as well. Going from a possible felony DUI with an accident and a blow almost twice the legal limit to a dismissal and no fines, classes or other conditions was a terrific result.

0.132 Blow- Defended Due To Health Condition

E.M was arrested for DUI by the Illinois State Police. E.M. suffered from multiple sclerosis and took medication that assisted her with her balancing problems that actually helped her to walk, talk and function normally. However, at trial, the state was not able to lay a foundation for the breath test of 0.138 and the Trooper could not state for certainty that the impairment that he observed was due to alcohol as he did not know how the multiple sclerosis impacted E.M.'s ability to do the field sobriety tests. Finding of Not Guilty

0.187 Blow-Defended to Health Condition

S.B was arrested by the Buffalo Grove Police Department and charged with DUI. S.B suffered from Multiple Sclerosis and clearly told the officer as depicted on the videotape. Expert Joseph Citron was hired as an expert witness to testify on behalf of S.B. Citron is an opthamologist with experience in multiple sclerosis and certified in proper administration of field sobriety test via NHTSA. I already obtained a recission of S.B's 3 year statutory summary suspension by proving that the law enfocement sworn report was defective based upon People v Cooper. However, even though that was a great win, it would be a moral victory if I could not win the DUI or get the case reduced to the lesser offense of reckless driving based upon S.B. having a prior DUI supervision 3 years ago. After hearing, the ASA realized that it would be in his interest and our interest to resolve the case via reckless driving. And we did. Recission of 3 year statutory summary suspension and reckless driving with a double over blow. Great Result.

0.105 Blow - Issue with Observation Period

N.O. was arrested by the Gurnee Police Department and submitted to a breath test showing he blew a 0.105. After receiving all the discovery and thorough investigation of the case, the booking room video clearly depicted a violation of the 20 minute observation period prior to the breath test. After winning the summary suspension due to that, I filed a Motion in Limine seeking to exclude the breath test. I also told the prosecutor, that we would plea to the speeding charge with a fine. Due to the hole in his case, this prosecutor reluctantly agreed. Result, plea on speeding violation with recission of statutory summary suspension.

Clearly Intoxicated Based Upon Audio- Taken Outside Scope Of Camera

G.L was arrested by the Hoffman Estates Police Department for DUI while on his way to pick up his daughter! After being pulled over, the officer, due to the cold, told the Defendant to go inside the building where he was picking up his daughter to do field sobriety tests of which we could hear from the officer's microphone but could not see. I was successful in my filing of a motion for sanctions excluding the videotape based upon a violation of the eavesdropping statute and People v Ceja and the Judge further found that there would be an inference that what would have been contained on the videotape would be favorable to G.L. Finding of Not Guilty after trial

0.082 Blow - Margin Of Error

D.L. was arrested in Chicago for DUI and blew a 0.082. Due to the closeness of the blow to the legal limit and D.L.being a first offender, it was worthwhile and without risk to proceed to trial. The trial went our way. Based upon the margin of error in certifying the machines coupled with the fact that D.L. testified that she had not consumed an alcoholic beverage within2 hours of the breath tests, the Judge felt there was reasonable doubt and found her not guilty. NOTE: D.L. did fairly well on the field sobriety tests.

0.163 Blow-No probable Cause- No Case For The State

J.K. was arrested by the Niles Police Department and eventually submitted to a breath test yielding a 0.163. J.K. almost drove into north bound lanes while driving southbound and almost took out two cars as it was captured on video. When the Officer approached the car,he immediately demanded J.K's keys and told him to shut the car off. Due to "weather", the Niles Police decided to do field sobriety tests at the Niles P.D. J.K.was not handcuffed and voluntarily agreed to go back to the police station to complete some testing which he did quite well on. After hearing, the Judge felt that probable cause was lacking and suppressed the breath test. The State then dismissed the case. This was a great result along with the fact that I already obtained a recission of statutory summary suspension on the previous court date

0.143 Blow - CDL- No Basis To Stop Vehicle

I.R. was arrested for DUI by the Illinois State Police. I.R. lived in the State of Wisconsin and had a commercial driver's license (CDL) which causes some licensing problems even upon a disposition of supervision on a DUI. Accordingly, I asked the State to amend the case to reckless driving. The State said No. I proceeded to the Motion to Quash Arrest and won based upon the stop being invalid. According to the ruling, all field sobriety testing and the 0.143 blow were suppressed. The State, after losing the hearing, asked if we wanted to "take a reckless". Our response was "no". That ship had sailed. State filed a motion to reconsider. Denied. DUI DISMISSED!