DWI/DUI Case Results in Nashville, TN

Charge

Implied Consent Violation (Civil)

Location

Davidson County, GS One, Special Judge

Allegations

During a traffic stop, the client declined a roadside breath test and was cited for an implied consent violation. After transport, a hospital blood draw was taken. We examined the reports to pin down the timeline of the initial refusal versus later consent and how officers documented each step. We engaged the prosecutor with that sequence and mitigating circumstances and pressed for a limited resolution. The case was resolved with straight probation.

Charge

DUI - First Offense

Location

Rutherford County, Judge Ben Bennett

Allegations

Police approached our client while parked in a private lot for a welfare check, then claimed an odor of alcohol and turned it into a DUI investigation. The officer pressed for a vehicle search even though consent was unclear. The client declined field sobriety tests and a breath test, and a blood draw was obtained hours later by warrant. We obtained the videos, reports, and toxicology, and challenged the escalation, the search basis, and the delay before the draw. Faced with those issues, the prosecution reduced the charge and accepted straight probation.

Charge

DUI - First Offense

Location

Sumner County, Judge Kee Bryant-McCormick

Allegations

After a minor collision, the client parked near a store and later encountered officers who noted sluggish behavior and directed field sobriety tests. She cooperated throughout and a blood sample was taken at the jail, with alcohol returning at zero while the lab pursued a full toxicology screen. We pressed for body cam footage and challenged the timeline, emphasizing indications that any substance use occurred after driving. We also documented her completion of inpatient treatment. Following persistent negotiations, the case was resolved with probation.

Charge

Driving Under the Influence (DUI)

Location

Rutherford County, Judge Ben Hall McFarlin III

Allegations

After a late-night traffic stop for alleged lane maintenance, campus police arrested our client for DUI following roadside tests and a later blood draw. We zeroed in on how the field tests were instructed and performed and questioned the basis for the stop. We also scrutinized whether consent for the draw was valid and the effect of the delay between driving and testing. With those evidentiary issues on the table and no prior record, we pressed negotiations. The state agreed to reduce the charge and the client received straight probation.

Charge

Driving Under the Influence

Location

Rutherford County, Judge Ben Hall McFarlin III

Allegations

After a traffic stop for alleged lane drift, the client declined roadside sobriety tests and was taken to a station where a blood draw was performed. We immediately demanded the lab report and all dash and body camera footage to scrutinize the basis for the stop and whether proper consent warnings were given. The blood result came back elevated, but the documented measurement uncertainty put it near an enhancement threshold. We leveraged the consent advisement issue and testing margins in negotiations. The DUI was reduced to a lesser charge with straight probation.

Charge

DUI - First Offense

Location

Rutherford County, Judge Ben Hall McFarlin III

Allegations

Stopped after driving on a blown tire from a minor collision, our client was arrested for DUI. They admitted to drinking, completed field sobriety tests, and consented to a blood draw, with no other substances reported. We secured the body and dash camera footage and the lab records, and handled bond compliance by arranging alcohol monitoring while the vehicle was in the shop. Armed with the evidence and mitigation showing immediate sobriety efforts and full compliance, we pressed the prosecution in negotiations. The state reduced the charge and the client received straight probation.

Charge

Driving Under the Influence

Location

Rutherford County, Judge Ben Bennett

Allegations

Police arrested our client for DUI after a two-car collision, administering roadside tests and later securing a warrant for a hospital blood draw. From day one we documented the client's account that wet roads, a damaged tire, and fatigue played a major role in the crash. We demanded the body camera footage, the warrant and medical records, and full lab data. We challenged the reliability of the field testing and insisted on strict proof of the blood's handling and analysis. Facing those evidentiary issues and without definitive lab results, the state dismissed the case.

Charge

DUI

Location

Rutherford County, Judge Lisa Eischeid

Allegations

After a late-night single-vehicle rollover on a wet road, a bystander called police. Medics transported the client, so no field sobriety tests were done at the scene. A hospital blood sample was taken, then a later police blood draw followed, using different testing methods. We pressed for the bodycam and full lab packets and challenged the blood evidence, citing plasma versus whole-blood testing, the absence of roadside tests, and the client’s coerced-consent concern at the ER. As a contested hearing approached and those problems persisted, the prosecution dismissed the case.

Charge

DUI

Location

Davidson County, Birch Bldg, Court Room 5D

Allegations

After a wrong turn near a highway entrance led to a minor crash, officers investigated for impairment. The client declined a roadside breath test but later provided a hospital blood sample. We got involved quickly, securing body camera video and the full lab file, and pressed for a hearing while we scrutinized the basis for the stop and the blood draw procedures. With that pressure on the evidence, we negotiated a resolution for straight probation, avoiding harsher penalties and allowing the client to move forward.

Charge

Driving Under the Influence (DUI)

Location

Davidson County, Birch Bldg, Court Room 5C

Allegations

Police responded to a single-vehicle crash and arrested our client for DUI after noting an odor of alcohol and claiming bloodshot eyes. We obtained and reviewed the body cam, which showed the client steady on their feet but sounding groggy, consistent with side airbags striking the head. There was no breath or blood test, and the client did not perform field sobriety tests, leaving the state with only subjective observations. We challenged the reliability of those observations and emphasized the lack of chemical evidence. After negotiations, the prosecutor agreed to reduce the case to reckless driving with straight probation.