DUI Case Results (2017)

1st Offense OUI not guilty out of the Concord District Court In this case, my client was charged with a first offense OUI out of the Concord District Court and was arrested by the Stow Police Department. The defendant was stopped after crashing his car; at trial, a civilian witness testified that the client was driving erratically and had slurred speech. The police officer also testified that the client was unsteady on his feet, had slurred speech and a strong odor of alcohol. At trial, Attorney DelSignore argued that the Commonwealth could not prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt, because the Government could not exclude other causes of their observations. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty of OUI.

Fall River District Court 1st Offense OUI found not guilty after trial In this case, the client was arrested by the State police and the case was heard in the Fall River District Court. After years of litigation, the breath test results were excluded from evidence. Attorney DelSignore took the case to trial and discredited the State Trooper's observations that the defendant was impaired by alcohol. The trooper was very aggressive on the stand trying to make every observations seem to suggest impairment. This type of officer I have cross examined many times; often, their reluctance to provide straight answers and motivation to try to advance the case, back fires at trial. In this case, the defendant was found not guilty of OUI.

Attleboro District Court not guilty OUI after jury trial first offense OUI In this case, my client was alleged to have been speeding and the police officer claimed that the client consumed 4.5 mixed drinks. The officer also alleged that the client failed 3 field sobriety tests. At trial, Attorney DelSignore called the client and her sister to testify about how much she had to drink that night. My client testified that she only had 3 drinks and her sister confirmed that she did not feel that her sister was impaired. After a jury trial, the client was found not guilty of OUI but guilty of negligent operation of a motor vehicle. This is a common compromise verdict. It is a great outcome as the negligent operation has much less severe implications than an OUI conviction.

1st Offense not guilty out of the Milford District Court In this case, the client was arrested by the State police and the case was heard in the Milford District Court. It was transferred to Worcester District Court for trial. After trial, the client was found not guilty of a First Offense OUI.

4th Offense OUI not guilty after Jury Trial out of the Woburn District Court In this case, my client a business owner with 2 children in college, faced a 4th offense OUI. The client had never been to jail as a result of the prior offense being from over 20 years ago, but based on the change in Melanie's law, the client faced a mandatory one year sentence if convicted of a 4th offense. After litigating the issues regarding the breath test, it was excluded from trial. At trial, Attorney DelSignore presented video surveillance of the client's interaction after the accident with the other party. We subpoenaed video footage from a private car dealership where the parties exchanged information. At trial a Reading police officer testified that the client failed the nine step walk and turn, was unsteady on his feet and slurring his speech. At trial, Attorney DelSignore showed that the video did not support a finding that the client was unsteady and impacted the officer that the client failed the 9 step walk and turn. After a jury trial, the client was found not guilty, avoiding mandatory jail sentence of one year.

1st offense OUI out of the Malden District Court not guilty after jury trial In this case, the client was charged with a 1st offense OUI out of the Malden District Court. The Commonwealth presented testimony from an ambulance driver that the defendant was driving erratically and two Everett police officers. The ambulance driver testified that the defendant went over the yellow line and went on the side walk. The officers testified that the defendant hit the curb making a turn and stopped in the middle of the road.

At trial, the officer testified that the defendant left the car in drive and refused to shut the truck off. The officers testified that the defendant had slurred speech, bloodshot glassy eyes, smelled of alcohol and failed 2 field exercise.

At trial, Attorney DelSignore called his client to rebut the claims of erratic driving and to demonstrate that the client was not out partying but had been working that day. The client testified that he had a couple of beers while fixing his brother's stairs. Attorney DelSignore also played portions of a booking video which showed the defendant standing without difficulty. This was in contract to the officers claim that he was having trouble standing and highly unsteady on his feet. After a jury trial, the defendant was found not guilty.

1st offense not guilty after trial in the Taunton District Court This case concluded the final of 3 straight case in Bristol County over a five day period.

In this case, the defendant was arrested by the Berkely police department and the case was heard in the Taunton District Court. After the breath test of .11 was excluded from evidence, the Commonwealth case relied exclusively on the observation of the arresting officer. The defendant was stopped because the registered owner was unlicensed. The defendant had a license but the stop was approved as permissible under the Fourth Amendment by the Court. At trial, with no evidence of erratic driving, the Commonwealth case relied solely on the field tests. The defendant was found not guilty of OUI.

1st Offense OUI out of the New Bedford District Court, not guilty after Jury Trial In this case, the client was charged with a first offense OUI after being arrested by the Acushnet Police Department. The client was alleged to have driven erratically and followed by a citizen witness. The civilian called 911 and the client was stopped by a police officer based on the 911 call and officer's observations of speeding. The officer alleged that the defendant failed field sobriety tests, had bloodshot eyes and a blank stare on his face, indicative of being under the influence of alcohol. At trial, Attorney DelSignore cross examined the witness on his observation to minimize the impact of his testimony. In addition, he cross examined the officer on how he was trained to administer the field exercise and pointed out that the officer did not follow his training in administering the tests. Video evidence was used showing that the client appeared to have good balance. The district attorney also used video which he felt showed signs of impairment. The breath test of .14 was excluded from evidence prior to trial. The client was found not guilty after trial on the OUI offense, but found guilty of negligent driving. This was the split we were hoping for given the strong testimony of the civilian regarding the unsafe driving. The defendant avoided an OUI conviction.

Attleboro District Court not guilty OUI 1st offense after Jury Trial In what was the start of three consecutive trials in Bristol Country, this case ended with a jury finding the client not guilty. My client was found asleep behind the wheel with the keys in the ignition. The Attleboro Police charged my client with OUI. The client was in the parking lot of a restaurant. The key was turned but the engine was not running. Technically under the law, the keys in the ignition can be operation. At trial, the defense was that the client was tired and not under the influence. However, another theme was that he was not driving and that the jury did not have to find operation merely because the keys were in the car. The evidence was that the defendant was in a fairly deep sleep. After the jury deliberated, they returned a verdict of not guilty of OUI. The client avoided any further license loss associated with an OUI conviction.

OUI 3rd offense reduced to 2nd offense. In this case, the client was charged with a 3rd offense OUI out of the New Bedford District Court. The client avoided a six month minimum mandatory jail sentence that would have been imposed in the event of conviction of an OUI 3rd offense.

Not Guilty OUI out of the Taunton District Court after one Car accident In this case, my client was charged with OUI by the Seekonk police department after a one car accident. The police alleged that the client failed 3 field sobriety tests, was unsteady on his feet, had bloodshot and glassy eyes. Further, an open container of alcohol was found in the car. At trial, Attorney DelSignore stressed that the weather could have played a role in causing the accident and impacted the performance on the field sobriety tests. Further, the officer was cross examined on the one leg standing revealing numerous instructions that the defendant followed. The client was found not guilty after trial.

Barnstable District Court not guilty of OUI 1st offense In this case, the client had been charged with OUI 1st offense after being in Barnstable for educational purposes. A guilty finding would have been detrimental to his career. In this case, a motion to suppress resulted in some of the defendant's statements being excluded from trial. At trial, the officer testified that the defendant struck a curb turning into a parking area and failed 3 field sobriety tests. Attorney DelSignore questioned the officer about his training in administering these exercises and pointed out what the client did correctly as well as the unreliability of some of the exercises. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty of OUI. The client accepted a CWOF on the negligent operation charge which does not result in any further license suspension.

Crossing marked lanes not guilty after jury trial in Marlborough District Court The client was charged with OUI 1st offense by the Hudson police and the case was heard in the Marlborough District Court. Based on motions filed prior to trial, the breath test of .12 was excluded from evidence. At trial, the officer testified that the defendant crossed the marked lanes and was on the wrong side of the road. The defendant was alleged to have failed field sobriety tests. A jury found the client not guilty of OUI.

OUI Roadlock not guilty out of the Westborough District Court In this case, the defendant was stopped at an OUI roadblock in Worcester Country and the case was brought to the Westborough District Court. The defendant was alleged to have failed field sobriety tests and consumed 6 to 7 beers. The breath test was excluded from evidence with a result of .17 based on the consolidated breath test litigation which our client was a part of. Despite the admission to drinking, the evidence was that it was much earlier in the day. Attorney DelSignore obtained a copy of the booking video from the State police and demonstrated that the defendant did very well on the fields sobriety tests. Based on the defendant's performance on the field tests, it was pointed out that it was inconsistent with the officer's opinion of impairment. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty.

1st Offense OUI not guilty after one car accident In this case, my client was charged with OUI by the State Police and the case was heard in the Fall River District Court. The client had been involved in an accident and was alleged to have slurred speech, been unsteady on his feet and possessed open containers of beer. At trial, Attorney DelSignore elicted questions about the injuries sustained to the defendant during the accident and his complaints of an injury. Despite that, the defendant was still requested to perform field sobriety tests. During trial it was argued that the defendant's performance on the one leg stand was inconsistent with someone under the influence. The defendant had trouble with the nine step but had informed the officer about an injury to his leg. Given the possibility that the defendant could have been startled from the accident and unsteady because of the accident, the defendant was found not guilty after trial.

OUI with an accident not guilty after trial in the Framingham District Court In this case, the client was involved in an accident on a very dark road; the location of the accident changed following the accident with the town adding stops signs in the area. After the accident, the defendant was evaluated by medical personnel. In this case, during trial it was clear that the officer's memory of the incident was lacking. The officer claimed to not recall much of the short interaction with the defendant. Based on this, Attorney DelSignore asked numerous question in order to elicit the I do not recall response. This called into question the officer's opinion that the defendant had slurred speech and was under the influence of alcohol. Further, in this case the officer never inspected the car to determine if the air bad went off. As a result of the gap in the evidence, the defendant was found not guilty.

.08 First Offense OUI out of the Lawrence District Court, not guilty after Jury Trial In this case, the client was charged with a first offense out of the Lawrence District Court and was arrested by the State police in the Andover Barracks. The client was stopped for speeding and allegedly failed the field sobriety tests, had a strong odor of alcohol and bloodshot and glassy eyes. The client submitted to a breath test which register just over the legal limit of .08. After much litigation around the breath test, the results were excluded from evidence after numerous motions were filed by Attorney DelSignore. The case was tried before a jury in the Lawrence District Court; after trial, the client was found not guilty.

OUI Hospital Blood test with accident not guilty after trial in the New Bedford District Court In this case, our client was charged with a first offense OUI after a one car accident. The defendant was arrested by the Dartmouth police department. The Commonwealth was unable to admit the blood test records at trial and was denied a request to continue to provide the necessary witnesses to establish the reliability of the evidence. At trial, the officer testified that the defendant had an odor of alcohol, slurred speech and bloodshot and glassy eyes. On cross examination, it was stressed that the defendant was alert at the hospital, did not try to avoid the officers, had good balance and that the signs of intoxication are similar to those of someone in an accident. After trial the defendant was found not guilty of OUI.

OUI dismissed out of the Lowell District Court In this case, the court dismissed the matter as the Commonwealth was not ready for trial. The Commonwealth requested a new date; we objected to the request and the judge dismissed the matter.

1st Offense OUI dismissed out of Dudley District Court In this case, our client was charged with OUI and the case was originally heard I the Dudley District Court. After many months of motions to get the breath test excluded from evidence, the results were finally excluded. The client was joined to all breath test litigation and was patient awaiting as motions were filed regarding breath test evidence. On the trial date, the Commonwealth was not ready and the case was dismissed.

1st offense OUi not Guilty out of the Westborough District Court In this case, my client was not a citizen and feared the immigration impact of a conviction. He worked at a restaurant and had been stopped for speeding and marked lane violations coming home from work. The officer claimed that the defendant failed field sobriety tests, that the client had slurred speech and bloodshot and glassy eyes. At the start of the case, Attorney DelSignore requested the booking video. The video was not preserved pursuant to the court order and was allegedly taped over as a result of lack of storage. At trial, this lost video was critical in the defendant being found not guilty. The client avoided any criminal charge which could have jeopardized his citizenship as well as resulting in a further license suspension.

Under 21 College student found not guilty of 1st offense OUI out of the Ayer District Court In this case, my client was under 21 and charged with a 1st offense OUI out of the Ayer District Court. The client was arrested by the Boxborough police department and alleged to have failed field sobriety tests, had bloodshot and glassy eyes and was unsteady on his feet. Open containers of alcohol were found in the car. At trial, Attorney DelSignore cross examined the officer regarding the factors that were inconsistent with impairment. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty, avoiding a 210 license loss as a result of being under 21.

1st Offense OUI dismissed in Worcester Country In this case the client was charged with a 1st offense OUI by the State police and the car was hard in East Brookfield District Court. After motion were denied, the case was scheduled for trial with Attorney DelSignore still challenging the admissibility of the breath test and the accuracy of the field sobriety tests. The Commonwealth was unable to proceed on the trial date and the case was dismissed.

In this case, the client was charged with a 1st offense OUI by the State police The case was heard in the Worcester District Court. The client was alleged to have committed several marked lane violations, failed field sobriety tests, including the one leg stand and nine step walk and turn. The officer also claimed he was unsteady getting out of the car. The client took a breath test that was excluded from evidence which was alleged to have been a .13.

Crossing marked lanes Client found not guilty out of the Plymouth District Court Client charged with OUI first offense out of the Plymouth District Court. The client submitted to a breath test with a result of a .14. The breath test was excluded as a result of litigation that has resulted in many of Attorney DelSignore clients having their breath test results excluded from evidence at trial. The case proceeded to trial and the police officer testified that the client crossed the marked lanes, had bloodshot and glassy eyes, was unsteady and failed 2 field sobriety tests. On direct examination, the officer added details that were not in the police report. On cross examination, the officer acknowledged that those details were admitted from the report and if they were not in the report than his prior testimony was wrong. He conceded that the report was the most accurate version of events. With the officer being impeached several times on this testimony, the defendant was found not guilty of a First Offense OUI.