DUI Case Results (2018)

1st offense OUI dismissed out of the Orleans District Court In this case, our client was charged with a first offense OUI out of the Orleans District Court. One of the first things we do on a new case is to request that the court preserve any video evidence in the case. This process made the difference in the case as the motion was allowed but the police department failed to preserve the video. As a result, we were able to obtain a dismissal of the OUI charge in exchange for a plea on the negligent operation offense. This is an issue that Attorney DelSignore frequently see come up in cases. In this case, it result in a dismissal of the charge.

2nd offense OUI not after jury trial in the Concord District Court In this case, our client was charged with a second offense after being arrested for OUI by the Concord police. The case was brought to trial in Concord District and the defendant charged with a second offense. The breath test was excluded from evidence in this case. The defendant was alleged to have crossed the marked lanes and failed the field sobriety tests. The challenge in the case was overcoming the admission that the defendant had five beers. The defendant testified that those beers were over the course of a long day. Further, on cross examination, Attorney DelSignore showed that the client did many things correctly on the field exercises. After trial, the jury returned a not guilty verdict, saving the client a 2 year license loss.

Not Guilty out of the Wrentham District Court After Jury Trial In this case, out client was charged with a first offense OUI by the Franklin police department. The client was alleged to have driven too slow and was a stopped for a faulty inspection sticker. The officer claimed that the client had a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot and glassy eyes as well as slurred speech. At trial, Attorney DelSignore pointed out that the officer did not score the tests according to his police training. Further, Attorney DelSignore emphasized what was left out of the officer's initial testimony, everything that the client did correct that was contrary to his opinion. After a jury trial, the jury found the client not guilty.

Not Guilty OUI 1st Offense Hingham District Court Client was pulled over in Hull after officer observed her driving on the dividing line of travel, without her headlights on. Officer testified client had red bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, smelled of alcohol and could not complete the alphabet test. The evidence showed that the area of the roadway was confusing and that the client never swerved or weaved while driving and that she appropriately drove through two intersections. After a bench trial client was found not guilty.

Dedham District Court not Guilty OUI Arrest by State Police Client was pulled over after state trooper observed him speeding and swerving on Rte. 95. The trooper testified at trial that the client had difficulty pulling over, that he had extremely red glassy eyes, that he strongly smelled of alcohol and that he failed two field sobriety tests. At trial Attorney DelSignore was able to show that the client had worked all day and was nervous when he was initially pulled over, however back at the barracks he showed good balance, and he had no difficulty following instructions. After bench trial the client was found not gui

Three-year Breathalyzer Suspension Overturned- Barnstable District Court Client was arrested for OUI second offense and refused the breath test. As a result of his refusal the RMV suspended his license for three years. Attorney DelSignore petitioned the court and asked that they overturn the suspension. Attorney DelSignore appeared in the Barnstable District court and presented argument regarding the client's inability to provide a sample for medical reasons, the deficiencies in the paperwork filed by the Registry as well as the recent issues with the breath test machine. After hearing the judge overturned the suspension and the client's license was reinstated.

East Hampshire District Court, 1st OUI at a roadblock dismissed after arrest by the State police In this case, our client was charged with a first offense OUI after being stopped at a roadblock. After we litigated every issue surrounding the breath test, the judge denied allo of our motions. When new evidence surfaced, Attorney DelSignore reopened the case and had the breath test excluded and was able to obtain a dismissal of the charge. This result was critical for our client who is a teacher and sports coach.

Ayer District Court, not guilty of OUI offense after an arrest by the Ayer Police Department In this case, our client was alleged to have operated under the influence after the police found her asleep on the side of the road. The officer alleged that the defendant seemed intoxicated and quickly placed her under arrest. At trial, Attorney DelSignore argued that the Commonwealth could not show that her actions were not explained by a medical cause as no medical professional evaluated the client. After trial, the client was found not guilty of OUI.

Not guilty OUI 2nd offense out of the Taunton District Court In this case, our client was arrested by the Easton police department and charged with a second offense OUI. The client was alleged to have been all over the road and caused fell asleep behind the wheel. At trial, a civilian witness testified to the seeing the accident; however, the civilian did not say that he thought the client was under the influence of alcohol. At trial, Attorney DelSignore argued that the Commonwealth could not exclude the possibility of the client being tired. After Trial, the defendant was found not guilty of a 2nd offense OUI.

Not guilty OUI 1st offense out of the Brockton District Court after an arrest by Bridgewater Police Department In this case, our client was charged for OUI after being stopped for speeding 15 miles over the speed limit. Whenever a case starts with a stop for speeding, that is a strong start to the case, because lack of erratic driving is something we can effectively use to create reasonable doubt. The defendant was alleged to have a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot and glassy eyes, and slurred speech. The officer claimed that the defendant performed poorly on the one leg stand and nine step walk and turn. Breath test evidence of .19 was excluded from evidence prior to trial and not considered as part of the evidence. At trial, we used an edited version of the booking from the Bridgewater police department to show that the defendant did not have slurred speech and rebut any claims of being unsteady, as she maintained perfect balance throughout the booking process. Further, Attorney DelSignore attacked the reliability of the field exercises, as an error on the field exercises does not mean that at a person is impaired given the exercises are unfamiliar to the person. It was argued that based on the stress and anxiety of the being confronted by a police officer, it is natural for someone to make some errors on the exercises. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty of OUI.

Not guilty 1st Offense OUI out of the Westboro District Court In this case, my was charged with a First Offense OUI by the State police and charged in the Westboro District Court. The case was ultimately transferred to Worcester District Court for trial. At trial, the officer alleged that the client committed three marked lane violations and nearly struck the guardrail. The officer testified that the client failed all of the field sobriety tests and smelled of a strong odor of alcohol and had glassy eyes. At trial, Attorney DelSignore crossed examined the officer who conceded the driving may have been caused by the defendant eating while driving and not being impaired by alcohol. The officer testified that the client showed good balance in the instruction stance, walked a straight line and took the correct number of steps on the nine step walk and turn. Attorney DelSignore argued that everything the client did right was inconsistent with impairment. The client was found not guilty of OUI after trial

1st Offense OUI not guilty out of the Attleboro District Court In this case, our client was charged with an OUI offense by the Massachusetts State police on Route 95. The client was leaving Boston after attending a concert and was stopped for alleged marked lane violations. The officer testified that the client smelled of a strong odor of alcohol, was unsteady and had slurred speech. This case involved a breath test but the evidence was excluded from trial. At trial, Attorney DelSignore had the officer admit that he was only following him one car length behind. Since the officer was essentially tailgating the client, it was argued that the marked lane violation may have been prompted by the officer's driving. Attorney DelSignore pointed out that the officer never investigated whether the client was simply tired and assumed impairment. After trial, the client was found not guilty of OUI.

1st Offense not guilty after client stopped at a Roadblock in Dedham In this case, the client was stopped at a roadblock or sobriety checkpoint in Dedham, Massachusetts near the Dedham Plaza, Shaws Market and Panera Bread, where the State and local police frequently conduct roadblocks. The client was alleged to have bloodshot eyes, odor of alcohol and admitted drinking alcohol, causing him to be diverted from the flow of traffic. The screening officer testified that the defendant failed two field sobriety tests and had difficulty getting out of the car. On cross examination, the officer conceded many signs inconsistent with impairment, including that the client did not have slurred speech, responded appropriately to questions, and showed the ability to walk a straight line on the nine step walk and turn. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty.

6 month breath test refusal suspension vacated In this case, we appealed a breath test refusal appeal. After a hearing in the district court, the judge found that the RMV failed to comply with the law in issuing the suspension and reinstated the client's license prior to the expiration of the six month refusal suspension.

Not guilty OUI and Negligent operation out of the Wrentham District court after an arrest by the Foxboro Police Department Client rear ended another vehicle and backed into a stop sign. Officer testified that client was unsteady on his feet, smelled of alcohol, had slurred speech, red glassy eyes and was unable to complete the ABCs. The officer further testified that the client was extremely belligerent both at the scene and during booking at the station. The jury ultimately returned a not guilty verdict on both the operating under the influence of alcohol charge and the negligent operation charge.

OUI under 21 client found not guilty in Taunton District Court In this case, our client was under 21 and charged with OUI. Following our advice, the client enrolled in the Youth Alcohol Program reducing the license suspension for under 21 drivers. However, a conviction for someone under 21 would result in an additional 210 day suspension. The case proceeded to trial. At trial, Attorney DelSignore presented pictures showing that the area of the alleged mark lane violation was one where drivers would naturally cross the lanes for a second based on the way the road was constructed. Attorney DelSignore cross examined the officer and demonstrated that the client dismayed many signs inconsistent with being under the influence. During cross examination, the officer conceded that the client performed many steps of the nine step and one leg stand correctly. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty of OUI, avoiding an additional license loss for being under 21.

Brockton District Court, 3rd Offense OUI not guilty after arrest by the Bridgewater police department In this case, our client was charged with a 3rd offense OUI, which carries a minimum mandatory six month jail sentence. The Commonwealth alleged that the defendant was under the influence of both alcohol and marijuana. This case involves complex evidentiary issues of law. At trial, Attorney DelSignore was able to preclude the officer from testifying to his opinion that the defendant was impaired by marijuana based on the officer's lack of training and the case of Commonwealth v. Gerhardt, where Attorney DelSignore wrote a brief assisting the defendant in that case given the Statewide importance of the issue in the Gerhardt case for all defendants charged with any crime of driving under the influence of drugs, especially marijuana. Attorney DelSignore crossed examined all three officers, showing that the client did not exhibit signs of impairment. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty of OUI 3rd offense.

Dedham District Court 2nd offense OUI arrest by the Westwood Police Department not guilty after trial In this case, our client was charged with a second offense OUI after allegedly driving over the marked lanes in Westwood. The officer alleged that the defendant failed the field sobriety tests, including the nine step walk and turn, alphabet and one leg stand. At trial, Attorney DelSignore used a picture of the area and showed that the officer did the field tests in a very difficult area for anyone to perform well. During the cross examination it was also pointed out things that the client did correctly. When officers write their reports and testify at trial, they omit signs that do not show impairment. During this trial and every other trial, Attorney DelSignore highlights those positive points. In this case, an edited video was played showing that the defendant did not look impaired by alcohol. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty of both OUI 2nd offense and negligent operation.

Framingham District Court 1st offense OUI arrest by the State Police not guilty after a Jury Trial In this case, our client was alleged to have been all over the road, driving erratically and committing marked lane violations. The officer testified and wrote in his report, that the defendant was very unsteady getting out of the car, failed the field sobriety tests. The officers report and testimony tried to paint the picture of someone that could not stand up. Further, at trial, our client testified to what she had to drink and the fact that she did not feel impaired. After a jury trial, the defendant was found not guilty of OUI.

Attleboro District Court 1st offense not guilty after Jury Trial In this case, our client who was a teacher was charged with a 1stOffense OUI by the North Attleboro Police Department. The civilian witness and the officer claimed that the defendant drove on the lawn of a private residence. The officer further testified that the defendant failed field sobriety tests and was unsteady on her feet. The breath test results were excluded by Attorney DelSignore as part of the Statewide Breath Litigation which the client was joined to. At trial, the defendant explained to the jury that she had two drinks and made a mistake an drove on the lawn briefly because it was near a parking lot. On cross examination, Attorney DelSignore pointed out that the client did many things correctly on the field tests. After trial, the jury found the defendant not guilty charge and guilty on the negligent operation.

Wrentham District Court OUI 1st Offense client found not guilty after being arrested by the Norfolk Police Department In this case, our client was arrested for OUI by the Norfolk police department. The client worked at a hospital so could not afford any time of conviction or admission on the OUI charge. The officer claimed that the client drove at a high rate of speed and failed to yield. The officer alleged that the defendant had a strong odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and slurred speech, as well as being unsteady getting out of the car. The officer further testified that the defendant failed the field sobriety tests. At trial, Attorney DelSignore objected when the officer tried to enter into evidence that the defendant refused to answer a questions about alcohol consumption. A defendant is under no obligation to answer questions and admission of this testimony would violate the privilege against self-incrimination as an attempt to shift the burden to a defendant. Additionally, Attorney DelSignore cross-examined the officer on his report which appeared to suggest that the defendant balanced for 30 seconds on the one leg stand. The officer conceded some favorable points about the defendant being polite, cooperative, alert during the booking process. All of these statements on cross-examination showed reasonable doubt. The client was found not guilty of the OUI charge. The client avoided any license loss or criminal conviction.

OUI 1st offense out of the Attleboro District Court not guilty after trial In this case, my client was arrested for OUI after being stopped for speeding. The officer alleged that he smelled an odor of alcohol, that she had bloodshot and glassy eyes as well as slow speech. The officer administered the standard field tests, the 9 step walk and turn and one leg stand test, and concluded that the defendant showed signs of impairment. The defendant submitted to a breath test of .09 and was placed under arrest. At trial, the breath test did not come into evidence based on problems with the breath test and litigation that the defendant had been joined to earlier by Attorney DelSignore. At trial, Attorney DelSignore showed that the defendant did many things inconsistent with someone under the influence of alcohol. She did not appear under the influence in the booking video; did many things correct on the field tests including keeping her foot up the correct height, starting on time and not missing heel to toe on the 9 step. The officer claimed that she missed some steps but when showed the report the officer acknowledged that he did not include that detail in the police report. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty.

OUI drugs not guilty out of the Attleboro District Court In this case, our client was charged with driving under the influence of drugs. The officer alleged that the defendant had prescription drugs on him as well as marijuana and claimed that the defendant was impaired. Based on the Commonwealth v. Gerhardt case, which we were a part of at DelSignore Law, writing a brief to the Court, the judge excluded any opinion evidence that the defendant was impaired. Further, on cross examination it was demonstrated that the defendant did some aspects of the field tests correctly. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty.