Driving Offenses Case Results

Internal Reference # 1008 same Defendant as 1007

Facts : Defendant was previously charged with a DUI in another case. Defendant was given probation in previous DUI case. Defendant was charged with Violation of Probation for driving on suspended license and driving with license expired for more than 6 months.

Result: Defendant was charged with driving on suspended license and driving with license expired for more than 6 months. The win in this case was the Withhold of Adjudication and Court Costs and no jail on the VOP.


Internal Reference # 1010

Traffic Criminal Offense

Facts : The defendant was charged with Driving License Suspended, Pers/INJ/PROT/INS require, and Fail to Display Veh Reg

Results : Withheld of adjudication and charges 2 and 3 dismissed.


Internal Reference # 1044

At about 2149 hours, Deputy D observed the defendant westbound on the road and observed her cut in front of another vehicle, causing that vehicle to hit his brakes in order to avoid colliding with the defendant. The defendant continued west at a high rate of speed. 85 MPH on a posted 40 MPH zone. Deputy D activated his lights and siren at about the 2000 block and the defendant delayed in pulling over. At one point the defendant failed to maintain and single lane and followed too closely when she pulled behind another vehicle. The defendant finally stopped. Deputy D detected slurred speech, red/bloodshot eyes and a strong odor of an alcoholic beverage whenever the defendant was speaking. Deputy D requested that Deputy G respond. At about 2215 hours, Officer G responded and made contact with Deputy D and the defendant who was sitting in her vehicle. Deputy G was brief and took over the investigation. The defendant stated that she has no injuries and is not on medication. Deputy G asked her that she smelled alcohol and how much did she drink? She stated that she had 2 or 3 vodka and tonic drinks at a location about hour and a half ago. Deputy G asked her if she was willing to perform a series of standardized field sobriety exercises. She was wearing black sandals and agreed to perform the SFSE, they are as follows:

The One Leg Stand: She put her right food down on counts 1002, 1002, 1001. At this point, Officer G advised her to stop on account that she may fall.

Finger to Nose: She missed the tip of her nose on four occasions and at one point she touched her lips. She also opened her eyes and failed to tilt her head back.

Walk and Turn: She could not maintain balance during instructional phase. She took 4 steps and lost her balance on steps 3 and 4 and after 4 she stops and states, “I blew it”.

Based on Deputy D’s observation, her statements, SFSE, and Officer G’s observation and experiences, the defendant was placed under arrest at about 226 hours, for operating a motor vehicle while impaired and Careless Driving. Deputy G transported her to the BAT(Blood Alcohol Testing Center) and the vehicle was towed for secure storage. At the BAT, the Florida Implied Consent(FIC) was read and she agreed to provide breath samples. The samples yielded 0.138 and 0.138. She attached influence report. She was then transported to the main jail.

The defendant was arrested and charged with Careless Driving 316.1925(1) and DUI Alcohol or Drugs 1 st Offense (316.193-2a2a)

Process: After discovery and depositions were taken, the case was set for jury trial. On the day of trial, the state attorney proffered to the court that a key witness(police officer) was unavailable for trial due to being hospitalized and on sick leave. During the course of the proffer, the state attorney seemed inconsistent in their statements. The jury trial was rescheduled and Mr. Foley pulled the pay stubs, attendance, and sick leave of that officer. Upon receipt of that information, Mr. Foley filed a Motion to Strike Witness. Without that witness, the state would have a difficult time proving their case and chief. The state requested a rehearing over Mr. Foley’s objection and the Motion to Strike was vacated.

Results : The case was set for trial, prior to the trial beginning; the judge warned the defendant that if she was convicted by a jury of her peers, he could sentence her up to 6 months in the county jail. Based on the inconsistent decisions by the court, the stress of the case lasting over a year, and the possibility of jail time, the client accepted the minimums to a first DUI. Adjudication, 6 months probation, 6 months drivers license revocation, 50 community service hours, and 10 day vehicle immobilization. The defendant was able to travel freely.


Internal Reference # 1060

Facts :

On 2/16 at approximately 2106, Officer D responded to the location in reference to a hit and run accident involving 2 vehicles.

Upon arrival the Defendants vehicle was not on the scene (left the scene). Teletype check revealed the hit and run’s vehicle is registered to an address at another location not too far from where the accident occurred. Officer D later responded to the address and made contact with the vehicle’s owner who advised she was driving southbound on a road when vehicle 2 collided with her vehicle.

Contact was then made with Driver of Vehicle 2 who stated she was driving southbound when driver of vehicle 1 attempted to change lane and collided with her vehicle. Driver of vehicle 2 stated driver of vehicle 1 exited her vehicle and assessed the damage and told her not to report the accident. Driver of Vehicle 2 stated when she called the police. The defendant got into her vehicle and drove westbound. Driver of vehicle 2 stated that the defendant was an older white female.

There was no visible sign of injury.

Charges:

1. Accident with Property Damage, Leaving the Scene (1207-WHJ)

2. Improper Lane Change W/ Provisions/ Pulling Out In Front Of Vehicle Going In Same Direction (1208-WHJ)

Results :

1. Accident with Property Damage, Leaving the scene – Withhold of Adjudication and $60 fine

2. Improper Lane Change - dismissed


Internal Reference #1077

Facts : The Officer saw the defendant approaching in outside lane at a high rate of speed. The defendant passed by and switched to center lane with out signal. The Officer moved to the outside lane and saw the defendant very close to another vehicle and following that vehicle. The defendant switched to the inside lane and sped up cutting across all 3 lanes at one point. The Officer finally pulled the defendant over.

Charges:

Reckless Driving

Process: The judge originally wanted to give the defendant a conviction and 30 days in jail. After the defendant retained Mr. Foley, he had discussions with the state attorney and the judge and was able to reduce that sentence to a withhold of adjudication, 8 years of driving school, and a Mothers Against Drunk Driving program/class.

Results :

Reckless Driving – Withhold of adjudication, 8 hours driving school, and Mothers Against Drunk Driving Class.

No Probation, No Jail, No Adjudication, No Conviction


Internal Reference # 1078

Facts : The defendant was charged with Failure to Change Vehicle Registration.

Results : The charge was dismissed


Internal Reference #1080

Facts : The defendant was charged with operating a motor vehicle/ using a mobile home with an expired registration: Expired 6 months or less.

Results : Case Dismissed.


Internal Reference # 1101

Facts : The defendant was issued citations for Expired DL More Than 6 Months and Tinted Windshield

Results : The charge of Expired DL More Than 6 Months was withheld and the defendant was only required to pay fines. The charge of Tinted Windshield was dismissed.


Internal Reference # 1118

Facts : The defendant had his driver’s license suspended

Results : The defendant pleaded No Contest to the charge of Driver’s License Suspended and the charge was Withheld. The defendant was required to pay a fine.


Internal Reference # 1125

Facts : On 8/20 at 1243 hours, Officer S was dispatched to the south end of the an airport in reference to a white male standing in a non movement area between taxi way Echo and taxi way Hotel. Upon arrival contact was made with the witness(airport security officer), who stated that he observed a white male later identified by his Florida Drivers License as the defendant standing next to the taxi way in a posted Do Not Enter area. Contact was made with the defendant who did walk past the posted Do Not Enter signs and remained in a movement area without written permission from the airport manager. The defendant stated he was photographing a friend’s plane taking off. The defendant was issued a notice to appeal.

The defendant was charged with Movement on Runway/ No persons on Movement Area (MO 7-90)

Results : Mr. Foley was successful in having the charge Nolle Prosequi (dismissed)


Internal Reference #1159

Facts : Officer W came into contact with the defendant, identified via Florida Drivers License, after his involvement in a traffic crash.

Police Service Aid S was conducting traffic control when she observed the defendant rear-end another vehicle. PSA S called for another unit to assist her and Officer W arrived on scene shortly after. PSA S never lost sight of the defendant’s vehicle and made immediate contact with him behind the wheel to check on injuries. PSA S told Officer W that the defendant had slurred speech and the smell of alcohol emitting from his facial area. While conducting the traffic crash investigation, Officer W also noticed the defendant had glassy eyes, extremely slurred speech, and alcohol emitting from his facial area when she spoke. Once PSA S completed her traffic crash investigation, Officer W began a criminal DUI investigation.

Officer W called over the radio to have another officer respond with a DUI camera. No units were available with a DUI camera on either Charlie or Alpha shift. Officer W read the defendant his constitutional rights via his department issued card. Officer W then asked the defendant to step out of his vehicle. The defendant almost fell down and had to brace himself using his arms against the vehicle to keep from falling.

Officer W then asked the defendant where he was coming from and he said “I was fishing for the past couple hours”. Officer W then asked the defendant if he drank any alcohol and he said, “Yes, I had three beers”. Officer W asked the defendant if he knew what time it was and he said, “I don’t know, 7:30 maybe”, the current time was 2056 hrs. Officer W asked the defendant if he would voluntarily submit to some roadside sobriety exercises, he agreed. While questioning the defendant he had a hard time answering and keeping his thoughts focused. When Officer W asked the defendant to walk with him to the test site he began to speak about his daughter getting married. The defendant kept speaking on unrelated topics and Officer W had to ask him the same question multiple times to receive an answer.

Officer W asked the defendant if he wore glasses and he said yes, but for work only, and that he would not need them to perform the exercises. The defendant advised that he was not injured, not under the care of a doctor, and had not taken any illegal or prescription drugs in the last 24 hours. The tests were performed in a debris free parking lot with ample street lighting, the results are as follows:

HGN – The defendant showed lack of smooth pursuit to 90 degrees in both eyes, onset prior to 45 degrees, and distinct sustained HGN at maximum deviation. All six clues were detected. The defendant was swaying back and forth during the test and kept raising his hands for balance.

Walk and Turn – The defendant had to be told numerous times tor remain in the starting position during the instructional phase of the test. The defendant could not hold the position and stood casually during the rest of the instructions. Once the defendant began the test, Officer W had to remind him to count out loud as the third step. The defendant missed the line on all the steps and kept his arms raised for balance. The defendant continued to take steps until the count of eleven. On the walk back the defendant did not remain heel to toe and walked off the line on all the steps. The defendant again took eleven steps. Once the test was complete the defendant said, “I was supposed to take nine steps I think.”

One Leg Stand – During the instructional phase the defendant could not hold the position and kept moving his feet and arms to keep balance. The defendant then advised on a undisclosed date he had back surgery and refused to complete the test.

At this point, Officer W believed the defendant was operating a motor vehicle under the influence to the extent that his normal faculties were impaired. The defendant was placed under arrest and Officer W asked him to submit to a lawful test of his breath. The defendant refused to provide a sample and Officer W read him implied consent from a department issued card. The defendant advised that he understood and still refused to provide a sample. The defendant was transported to the police department and was released to the custody of Sheriffs deputies.

The defendant was arrested and charged with DUI With Property Damage (1 st Offense)(316.193(2)(A)(2)A) and Driving While License Canceled/Suspended/Revoked 1 st Offense(322.34(7)A). This was the defendants third DWI, he had two previous convictions.

Process: When the defendant contacted Mr. Foley, the state had already offered 4 months of county jail followed by probation. Mr. Foley contacted the state attorney and was able to negotiate a non jail sentence. The defendant received 12 months of mail in probation and was able to travel freely.

Results : DUI with Property Damage -12 months adjudication , 6 months drivers license suspension, no alcohol or intoxicants, 2 years interlock device.

DUI - Dismissed

Driving While License Suspended – Adjudicated Guilty


Internal Reference #1084

Facts : On 11/13, at approximately 2201 hours, Sgt L was traveling eastbound and entered onto the I595 entrance ramp. He began to travel in the middle lane. Sgt L observed a vehicle quickly approaching his, traveling behind him tailgating him. Sgt. L was in a marked police car. The vehicle then abruptly swerved to his right and passed him and swerved back in the middle lane, just in front of him. Sgt L stated that the defendant was again tailgating the vehicle in front of him. The defendant then swerved into the left lane to pass the vehicle. Sgt. L stated that other motorist had to slam on their brakes due to the defendant cutting them off. Sgt. L stated that the driver then accelerated and continued his aggressive driving pattern. Sgt. L stated that he visually estimated the river’s speed to be approximately 85-90 mph. Sgt. L attempted to catch up to the vehicle, however, due to traffic was unable to safely catch up to him until later. Sgt. L stated that the driver began to tailgate Officer L’s police vehicle. Sgt. L stated that due to him slowing down, he was able to catch up to him and initiate a traffic stop on the vehicle for his erratic and aggressive driving pattern.

Sgt. L made contact with the driver, later identified as the defendant by his Florida driver’s license. Sgt. L observed the defendant to have glassy, bloodshot and watery eyes. He requested the defendant’s driver’s license. The defendant retrieved his wallet and even though his driver’s license was visible, the defendant passed over it several times. After several moments, Sgt. L told him where his driver’s license was, however, he again was unable to find it for several moments. Sgt. L could also smell the odor of an alcoholic beverage coming from his mouth and facial area as he spoke. He then requested a DUI camera equipped car to respond to his location. Officer F responded for the investigation. Sgt. L then requested that Officer C respond.

Upon Officer C’s arrival, Sgt. L advised her of his driving pattern and physical observations. Officer C then approached and met with the defendant. She observed that the defendant had bloodshot, watery, and glassy eyes. Officer C introduced herself to the defendant and also could smell an odor of an alcoholic beverage coming from his facial area as he spoke. Officer C asked the defendant where he was coming from and he stated a football game. Officer C then asked him if he had anything to drink and he stated 3 or 4 beers. Officer C then determined to conduct a DUI investigation. Officer C asked the defendant to exit his vehicle and instructed him where to walk to so that she could further speak to him and ask him to consent to field sobriety exercises. Officer C requested the defendant to walk with her over to the side of the road and the defendant complied. Officer C then asked the defendant where he was coming from and he stated a friend’s house in Pines. Officer C then asked him where he was prior to that and he stated a football game. Officer C asked him what he had to drink and he stated 3 or 4 beers. She asked him what kind and he stated Coors Light in cans. Officer C then asked when the last time he ate and he stated at 1230 and 4:30. Officer C then asked him when he first started drinking and he stated at about 12:00 and his last drink was about 4:00 to 4:30. Officer C asked if he was taking any medication and he stated no. He did not take any illegal drugs and was not under a doctor’s care. Officer C did state that he had prior knee surgeries, however, nothing that would prevent him from being able to perform field sobriety exercises. Officer C then requested that he perform field sobriety exercises and he stated that he would.

Officer C then performed HGN on the defendant. The defendant had all three clues in both eyes (Lack of Smooth Pursuit, Nystagmus at maximum Deviation, and Onset Prior to 45 degrees). During the exercises, the defendant began to sway back and forth. Officer C noticed that the defendant had bloodshot, watery, and glassy eyes.

Officer C then instructed the defendant on how to perform the One Leg Stand. The defendant stated that he understood the instructions. The defendant raised his right leg. He utilized his arms for balance, more than 6 inches from his side. The defendant improperly counted by skipping numbers(1000-1000-12,1000-11,1000-12). He also placed his foot down due to losing his balance on counter number 15. The defendant also failed to look down at his foot as he was counting as he was instructed to do.

Officer C then instructed the defendant on how to perform the Walk and Turn exercise. She instructed the defendant to stand with his left foot on the line and the right foot in front of his left with his hands down by his side. Officer C instructed the defendant to maintain that stance during the instructions. The defendant stated that he understood. During the instructions, the defendant lost his balance and could not maintain his balance during the instructions. It took the defendant several moments to be able to place himself back into the proper stance. Once Officer C completed the instructions, she asked the defendant if he stood and he stated yes. The defendant began and Officer C observed the defendant miss heel to toe on steps forward 4,6, and 8. The defendant made an improper turn by just turning around and not taking small steps around as instructed. He missed heel to toe steps back on steps 4, 5, and 6.

Due to the defendant’s poor performance of the exercises, Officer C determined that the defendant was under the influence to the extent that his normal facilities were impaired. Officer C then placed the defendant into custody. Officer C asked that he consent to a breath test and he first stayed yes, and then no. Officer C then read Implied Consent to the defendant from a pretext card. The defendant then stated that he would take a test of his breath for the purpose of determining its alcoholic content. The defendant was then transported to the police station for booking by Officer F. Officer F completed a breath test and provided Officer C with the results. The first breath was a .207, the second breath was .186, and a third breath was a .203.

The defendant was arrested and charged with

DUI (1 ST Offense)(316.193(2)(A)(2)A)

License Suspended W/O Knowledge(323.34(1))

Careless Driving(316.1925(1))

Results :

DUI (1 ST Offense)(316.193(2)(A)(2)A) – Adjudicated, 6 months probation, minimums to a 1 st DUI

License Suspended W/O Knowledge(323.34(1)) - Dismissed

Careless Driving(316.1925(1)) – Dismisse


Internal Reference #1087

Facts : While on routine patrol, a bolo was given by dispatch regarding a vehicle driving northbound in the southbound lanes. Driving southbound with emergency overhead lights and siren activated on Officer D’s patrol car, Officer D continued to get updates from dispatch as to the location of the defendants vehicle heading northbound, which was in the inside lane(left lane). As Officer D approached a left curve in the roadway, he observed the defendants vehicle approaching northbound in the inside southbound lane. Moving over to the center lane, the defendant’s vehicle moved over to the left paved shoulder and slowed to a stop. Stopping on the left shoulder south of the defendant’s vehicle, Officer D reversed backwards to the front of the defendant’s vehicle. Exiting his patrol car, Officer D approached the defendants driver’s doors observing the defendant behind the wheel. Officer D motioned to the defendant to exit from the vehicle. Officer D explained to the defendant why he stopped her vehicle and requested the defendants drivers license. The defendant and Officer D walked back to her vehicle to retrieve her license from a black purse, observing the defendant unsteady on her feet. The defendant was fumbling through her wallet to get her license. While conversing with the defendant at roadside, Officer D observed the defendant to have an odor of an alcoholic beverage coming from her breath along with bloodshot eyes and flushed face. Officer D requested the defendant to perform some free and voluntary roadside tests to determine if she was DUI. The defendant agreed.

First Test: HGN: The defendant had lack of smooth pursuit in both eyes, had HGN prior to 45-degree onset and at max deviation.

Second Test: Balance: The defendant sway side to side, opened eyes 2 times

Third Test: One Leg Stand: The defendant performed test correctly.

At the completion of the roadside tests, Officer D placed the defendant under arrest for DUI and secured the defendant in his patrol car.

Sgt. C arrived on the scene to assist Officer D with inventorying the defendant vehicle. Officer B was also on-scene as a backup to Officer D. Trooper M assisted Officer D by working a traffic crash caused by the defendant when traveling northbound. While enroot to the BAT facility, the defendant advised Officer D that she knew what she was doing by driving the wrong way and these last 2 weeks have been the worst of her life, due to a family friend passing away. (Breath Test Results: .162/. 158.). After Officer D completed the paperwork for booking, the defendant was transported to the main jail in Ft. Lauderdale. Implied Consent Warnings were read by Officer D on video and Miranda Warnings were read by Officer R.

The defendant was arrested and charged with

DUI(316.193.2a2a)

DUI Property Damage(316.193.3c1)

Careless Driving(316.1925.1)

Results :

DUI(316.193.2a2a) - Adjudication, 6 months(minimums)

DUI Property Damage(316.193.3c1) - Dismissed

Careless Driving(316.1925.1) - Dismissed


Internal Reference # 1096

Facts : On 2/4 at approximately 0233 hours, Officer K responded to a location in reference to a traffic stop. Officer U conducted a traffic stop on a car for speeding. Officer U advised he paced the above vehicle with his marked police vehicle. He advised the vehicle was traveling north. He advised the vehicle was traveling at a speed of 62MPH in a posted 45 MPH zone.

Officer U advised he conducted the traffic stop on the vehicle and made contact with the driver. He advised once making contact with the driver later identified as the defendant, Officer K noticed the defendant to have glassy bloodshot eyes and an obvious odor of an alcoholic beverage coming form his facial area as he spoke to him. He advised the defendant told him he was coming from a casino and had two drinks.

Officer K made contact with the defendant and while speaking to the defendant, he could detect a strong obvious odor of an alcoholic beverage emitting from his facial area as he spoke. Officer K also noticed the defendant to have slurred speech, and glassy bloodshot eyes. Officer K requested the defendant o step out of the vehicle. Once the defendant exited the vehicle, he swayed noticeably in front of him as they spoke.

Due to Officer K’s observations of the defendant and his driving pattern, he requested a DUI camera respond to his location. No camera was available.

Officer K informed the defendant that he was stopped for speeding and due to Officer K’s observations of him and the observations of his driving pattern, he was now conducting a DUI Investigation. Officer K requested that the defendant submit to some voluntary roadside sobriety exercises and the defendant refused. Officer K advised the defendant if he refused, Officer K would have to base his decision solely on his observations of his person and the observations of his driving pattern on making an arrest for DUI. The defendant advised he understood but still refused. Upon completion of Officer K’s investigation, he placed the defendant under arrest for DUI. Officer K believed that the defendant was operating a motor vehicle under the influence of an alcoholic beverage to the extent that his normal facilities were impaired. Officer K informed the defendant that he was under arrest for DUI and requested that he submit to a test of his breath to determine its alcohol content. The defendant refused and Officer K read him Implied Consent from a prepared text. The defendant advised that he understood what Officer K had read to him but still refused. The defendant was transported to the police department and then transported to jail.

Charges:

DUI 1 st Offense (316.193(2)(A)(2)A)

Speeding (316.189)

Results : DUI 1 st Offense (316.193(2)(A)(2)A) – Reduced to Reckless Driving

Speeding (316.189) - Dismissed


Internal Reference # 1101

Facts : The defendant was issued citations for Expired DL More Than 6 Months and Tinted Windshield

Results : The charge of Expired DL More Than 6 Months was withheld and the defendant was only required to pay fines. The charge of Tinted Windshield was dismissed.


Internal Reference # 1059

Facts : While on Interstate patrol, Trooper M was running rear stationary radar on the left shoulder of northbound interstate 95. Trooper M observed a black vehicle, later identified as a black 4 door Volkswagen with Florida tag traveling northbound at a high rate of speed. The radar counting unit showed a speed of 92 miles per hour in a 65 miles per hour zone. Trooper M then put his fully marked F.H.P. patrol unit with light bar, in drive in an attempt to catch up with the black Volkswagen. When Trooper M was able to catch up the vehicle, e observed the vehicle swerved side to side while traveling northbound in the right center lane. Trooper M then active his emergency lights to conduct a traffic stop on the vehicle. They both stopped on the right shoulder. As Trooper M walked to the driver of the vehicle, the only person inside, he met with the defendant, identified by her Florida driver’s license. Trooper M smelled an odor of an alcoholic beverage emitting from the defendant. The defendant had slurred speech, was slow to answer questions, and had blood shot watery eyes. Trooper M then had the defendant exit her vehicle. As he was speaking with the defendant, she was unsteady on her feet. Trooper M then asked if she would perform sobriety exercises. The defendant agreed. The first exercise was the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus. During the exercise, the defendant had rapid pupil movement, and was unable to keep her head still as instructed. The Second exercise was the walk and turn. During the exercise, the defendant did not keep heal to toe on all the first nine steps, slow to make the required turn, then forgot to walk nine heel to toe steps back. The Third Exercise was the One Leg Stand. During the exercise, the defendant was unable to keep her right foot off the ground six inches, putting her foot down four different times and raised her arms to keep balance.

Trooper M placed the defendant under arrest for Driving Under the Influence. Trooper D then transported the defendant to the B.A.T center. While on video, Officer M read Florida’s Implied Consent to the defendant to ask her to submit to a breath test. The defendant agreed to take the breath test. Two breath samples were taken with results of .207 and .190 G/210 L. Trooper M then transported the defender to the jail.

The defendant was arrested and charged with Driving Under The Influence (316.193.2A2A) and Unlawful Speed (316.187(2)(B).

Process: Mr. Foley filed a Motion to Suppress the stop for lack of probable cause. During the course of depositions, the police officer indicated that he was unaware of the testing procedure for the certification of his radar gun. The deposition of the company that actually certifies the radar gun was taken and was found that certain protocols were not exactly followed. Ultimately, the motion was not argued because the officer had indicated during sworn testimony that they visually estimated the car to be doing more than 20 miles an hour over the speed limit. Therefore, the Motion to Suppress could not go forward in good faith and was withdrawn. The defendant opted to take the plea rather than risk a trial.

Results : Mr. Foley negotiated with the prosecutor and the defendant plead No Contest to both charges. The judge accepted the plea and sentenced the defendant to 9 months probation, 6 months license suspension, 10-day immobilization, and court costs. The win in this case is that the defendant not only avoided any jail time but also avoided the maximum probation time.

Click on the following reviews to see what clients are saying about us
Client Reviews
I was charged with Domestic Violence few years ago and I was referred to Roger Foley from a family member! Roger is a BULLDOG! He was great and very aggressive in helping me beat this bogus case. Case was dismissed! He was on top of everything until the end!!
Now again in need of his help and wouldn't go anywhere else!
HIGHLY RECOMMEND
★★★★★
My wife (Mother of Stepson) and I Hired Mr Foley to represent my stepson in a minor criminal case. We would highly recommend as it is obvious to us That Mr Foley Genuinely cares and wants to do the Best he can for you which he did for us. Also has a great rapport with all parties in the courtroom.....
★★★★★
Roger P. Foley got me reinstated. Also he got my COS waived, an got me to still be terminated off of probation on my expected termination date. I feel very comfortable with the decision my lawyer made for me. Also i would refer him to anyone who has a criminal felony or misdemeanor case.
★★★★★
Roger is a very compassionate person, he truly cares about his clients. He helped me with my case and was there for me every step of the way even if it was just reassurance that I needed. I would recommend him to anyone, he is absolutely the best!
★★★★★
I think your firm did a great t job on 3 cases that were 28 years old. The results are better than expected. I truly appreciate the hard work that you and your firm put forth in obtaining the results that we did on this case.
★★★★★