Case Results

With more than 100 years of collective DUI defense experience, the lawyers at Thomas & Willis, LLC do their utmost to win every single case they take. In fact, when it comes to DUI cases, this Atlanta firm has won more cases than any other Georgia law office. Included in the firm's numerous victories are successes that took place in Georgia's Court of Appeals and Supreme Court. Our lawyers aim to provide a high level of defense for every single client, acting as powerful advocates in everything from DDS hearings to verdict appeals.

Below is a sample of the results secured by the firm's dedication and decades of insight.

1) Failure to obey traffic-control device, 2) DUI-alcohol less-safe, 3) FTML Charges Dismissed

An officer observed the client weave in and out of her lane several times, cross the double yellow line and at one point straddle both southbound lanes. The officer activated his blue lights, but the client was slow to respond to the officer’s commands. The client had bloodshot and watery eyes, her speech was mumbled and slurred, and she had a strong odor of alcohol coming from her mouth. After multiple requests by the officer, the client slowly exited the vehicle - swaying and disoriented. The officer noted that the client was unable to put together a coherent sentence. After the client refused to submit to any field sobriety tests or the State administered breath test, the officer applied for a warrant to draw the client’s blood. The results indicated that her BAC was 0.238. The blood test was suppressed due to problems with the warrant exposed by Greg’s investigation of the case. All charges were subsequently dismissed.

1) Failure to obey traffic control device, 2) FTML, 3) DUI Client’s DUI Charge Dismissed at Trial

A patrol officer saw the client run a red light before driving over the sidewalk and into the lawn of an apartment complex. The officer stopped the client and called a second officer to evaluate him for DUI. The client was still sitting in his vehicle when the second officer arrived to perform the DUI evaluation. The officer indicated that the client’s speech was thick and slurred and that he could smell a very strong odor of alcohol on the client’s breath. The officer also noted that the client’s eyes were red and glassy. The client was unsteady on his feet as he exited his vehicle. When asked if he would submit to field sobriety tests, the client asked the officer if he could just have someone pick him up. After the officer repeated his question, the client removed his phone from his pocket and attempted to call a friend. At this point the client was arrested for DUI and read the Georgia Implied Consent warning. The client refused to submit to the state breath test.

1) DUI-alcohol-less-safe DUI Dismissed

Several police officers arrived at a diner around 3 a.m. Upon their arrival one of the officers went to the bathroom to wash his hands. While waiting to enter the bathroom the client passed the officer who noted the client had a strong odor of alcohol coming from his person. The officer then observed the client leave a tip, walk outside, and sit in the drivers’ seat of a truck. The officer followed the client outside and asked if he could speak with him. After agreeing to talk, the officer told the client he could smell alcohol coming from his breath and wanted to make sure he was safe to drive. The officer asked the client how long he had been at the diner, and the client stated, “about 30-35 minutes.” The officer then asked how long it had been since the client last drank alcohol, and he told the officer, “about an hour ago.” The client refused to blow into the officer’s handheld breathalyzer and insisted that he had not driven to the diner. However, the client subsequently stated, “you can’t do anything to me, I just drove here to eat.” The client then refused to answer any further questions or cooperate - so the officer placed him under arrest. After the officer read Implied Consent, the client refused to submit to the State breath test. Charges were dismissed just prior to the beginning of the jury trial.

1) Impeding the flow of traffic, 2) DUI less-safe All Charges Dismissed

At 3:45 a.m. an officer pulled behind the client’s vehicle at red traffic light. After the traffic light turned green the client’s vehicle sat in the roadway momentarily before proceeding northbound. The officer then initiated a stop of the client’s vehicle for impeding the flow of traffic. Upon approach of the client’s vehicle the officer detected a strong odor of alcohol coming from the vehicle as well as the client’s breath. The client told the officer she had been drinking earlier in the evening. The officer asked the client to perform voluntary field sobriety tests and the client complied. However, in doing so, the client failed the walk and turn, the one leg stand and the horizontal gaze nystagmus (HGN) tests. The client subsequently refused to blow into the officer’s handheld breathalyzer and refused to provide the officer with a breath sample on the State’s breath testing machine (Intoxilyzer 5000). Prior to trial Greg filed a Motion to Suppress based on the legality of the officer’s stop. Specifically, that the client’s actions did not give rise to a reasonable articulable suspicion to stop the client for impeding the flow of traffic. The Court granted the motion and suppressed all evidence gathered a result of the illegal stop. Accordingly, the client’s charges were dismissed. This was the client’s second DUI arrest in less than three years.

1) DUI per se, 2) DUI less-safe, 3) Failure to Maintain Lane, 4) Reckless Driving Client Acquitted of DUI

A police officer stopped Greg’s client for driving erratically, failing to stay within his lane, and nearly colliding with a tractor trailer. After approaching the driver’s window, the officer smelled a strong odor of alcohol on the client’s breath. The client admitted to drinking alcohol, failed multiple field sobriety evaluations, and blew into the officer’s handheld breathalyzer, which registered his BAC at 0.130. The client was subsequently arrested for DUI and agreed to submit to the State administered breath test on the Intoxilyzer 5000. The Intoxilyzer 5000 reported the client’s BAC at 0.134 and 0.133. After the jury heard all of the State’s evidence - including the client’s BAC of 0.134 and 0.133 – Greg cross-examined the arresting officer about procedural mistakes made during the officer’s investigation. Greg then called an expert witness who was familiar with the Intoxilyzer 5000. Through the expert witness Greg demonstrated the unreliability and inaccuracy of the Intoxilyzer 5000. As a result, the jury found the client not guilty of DUI.

1) DUI less-safe, 2) Reckless Driving, 3) Failure to Maintain Lane, 4) Failure to Obey Authorized Person Directing Traffic Charges Reduced to Reckless Driving

Greg’s client approached a police roadblock at a high rate of speed. The client disregarded the roadblock and nearly struck an officer with his vehicle as the client sped through the checkpoint. Officers apprehended the client after a short chase in which the client drove his car off of the roadway and blew out his tires. After the client was removed from his vehicle, the officers noticed a strong odor of alcohol. The client had red blood shot eyes, dilated pupils, slurred speech, and could not stand without assistance. The client was unable to successfully perform any field sobriety tests. During the investigation of the client’s case, Greg discovered several issues involving the legality of the manner in which the roadblock was implemented. Although the client was convicted of DUI during a bench trial, Greg appealed the conviction. During the appeal process, Greg once again brought the legal issues with the roadblock to the attention of the prosecution. As a result, the State agreed to drop the DUI charge in return for a plea to lesser charge of reckless driving.

50 results found. Viewing page 1 of 9. Go to page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9   Next