How a Motion to Suppress Can Get Your DUI Dismissed in Florida
When I think a cop has done something wrong, I file a motion to suppress. Here’s the first thing you need to know about that phrase: a motion is just a fancy word for me asking a judge to do something. It’s not dramatic. It’s not like TV. It’s a written request that says, judge, here’s what the officer did, here’s why it was wrong, and here’s what I need you to do about it.
Now, sometimes when I make that argument, I’m essentially calling the officer’s testimony into question. That’s a delicate thing to do. You’re sitting in a Florida courtroom, and you’re telling a judge that this uniformed officer — someone who does this for a living — didn’t tell the whole truth on the stand. Most people assume that always goes badly for the defense. But not always. The case of Duke v. State, 82 So. 3d 1155 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) is one of my favorite examples of how a motion to suppress a DUI can work exactly the way the system is supposed to work.
Facing a DUI Charge in Florida?
A motion to suppress DUI evidence in Florida can end your case entirely — before it ever reaches a jury. The key is knowing whether the stop holds up under scrutiny. Call John Guidry at (407) 423-1117 to find out where you stand.
What Happened in Duke v. State
Duke was arrested for driving under the influence. His defense attorney filed a motion to suppress the traffic stop. If that motion succeeded, the entire DUI would follow it out the door. That’s how it works — a beautiful thing, as I like to say.
At the suppression hearing, the officer testified that he stopped Duke for three reasons: a wire hanging down in front of the license tag, Duke’s car crossing over a white line, and Duke’s failure to drive in a straight line. So far, that testimony tracked what the officer had written in his police report.
Then the officer added something new. He testified that Duke’s driving pattern made him look sick, tired, or impaired. He claimed that observation influenced his decision to make the stop. The problem was that this observation never appeared anywhere in his police report. He hadn’t mentioned it when he wrote everything down right after the arrest. He hadn’t mentioned it in discovery. He brought it up for the very first time at the suppression hearing itself.
The Judge Said: I Don’t Believe You
The county court judge looked at that testimony and made a decision. The officer’s report said nothing about Duke appearing ill or impaired. Now, months later, at the exact moment the defense attorney was arguing the stop was questionable, the officer suddenly remembered this crucial detail. The judge found that testimony not credible and granted the motion to suppress. The DUI was dismissed.
Those words — I don’t believe this witness — are what I call Harry Potter words. They are magic in a courtroom, and here’s why: when a judge bases a ruling specifically on the credibility of a witness’s testimony, no appellate court can overturn that decision. Credibility determinations belong exclusively to the trial judge. Nobody else gets to second-guess them. Everyone in the courtroom understood immediately that the case was over and nobody planned to appeal.
When the Prosecution Appealed Anyway
Of course, the prosecution appealed. The circuit court reviewed the transcript and sided with the officers, deciding that Duke’s driving pattern gave the officer reasonable suspicion that Duke appeared impaired. The circuit court even expressed surprise that the trial judge had granted the motion, noting that the officer’s testimony was “uncontroverted.”
Here’s the flaw in that reasoning, and it matters enormously. Uncontroverted doesn’t mean credible. Nobody disputed the testimony — but that doesn’t mean anyone believed it either. A judge who finds testimony not credible doesn’t need a competing witness to prove the officer lied. The county court judge watched this officer testify and made a judgment. The circuit court had no authority to substitute its own credibility assessment for the trial judge’s.
Consequently, Duke’s attorney appealed the circuit court’s ruling. The 2nd DCA agreed with the county court judge and reinstated the suppression of the DUI arrest.
Why the Police Report Is the Officer’s Bible
Here’s what you take away from Duke beyond the specific ruling. Police reports matter enormously at suppression hearings. An officer writes that report at the scene, when everything is fresh. It documents everything they observed that justified the stop and the arrest. When an officer shows up to a suppression hearing months later with an important observation that never appeared in that report, a sharp judge notices.
Defense attorneys notice too. Furthermore, prosecutors who believe everything an officer says without question don’t notice until it’s too late. That gap — between what the officer wrote at the scene and what the officer says at the hearing — is exactly where motions to suppress get won.
If You Want More Related Content
If you’d like to dig deeper into this topic, I’ve covered motions to suppress in detail, including four specific types and how each one works in a real Florida case.
Watch: https://youtu.be/fBY2HOWSA9c
I’ve also written a full breakdown of the Duke case and what it means when a judge calls a cop’s testimony not credible, which goes deeper on the appellate rules that make this ruling bulletproof.
Read: https://jgcrimlaw.com/articles/battery-on-law-enforcement-officer-florida-brown/
John’s Takeaways
- A motion to suppress is simply a request asking a judge to throw out illegally obtained evidence. A successful one can end a DUI case entirely — before trial, before a jury, before any of it gets that far.
- In Duke v. State, 82 So. 3d 1155 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012), the county court judge found the officer’s testimony not credible because he added a key observation at the hearing that never appeared in his police report.
- When a judge bases a ruling on witness credibility, appellate courts cannot overturn it. That’s one of the most powerful protections in a suppression hearing, and every attorney in the courtroom knows it.
- “Uncontroverted” doesn’t mean credible. The circuit court’s error was assuming that unchallenged testimony must be believed. The 2nd DCA corrected that mistake.
- What an officer puts in their report — and what they don’t — matters enormously. The gap between the written report and the courtroom testimony is where suppression motions get won.
Facing a DUI? Let’s Look at the Stop.
I’ve been filing motions to suppress DUI stops in Central Florida since 1993, and I know exactly what to look for in a police report before I ever walk into a suppression hearing. I represent clients across Orange, Seminole, Osceola, Lake, Brevard, and Volusia County.
If you were arrested for DUI, give my office a call. Let’s go through what the officer wrote — and what they didn’t.
John Guidry — (407) 423-1117
About John Guidry II
John Guidry II is a seasoned criminal defense attorney and founder of the Law Firm of John P. Guidry II, P.A., located in downtown Orlando next to the Orange County Courthouse, where he has practiced for over 33 years. With more than three decades of experience defending clients throughout Central Florida since 1993, Guidry has successfully defended thousands of cases in Orange, Seminole, Osceola, Brevard, Lake, and Volusia counties. He has built a reputation for his strategic approach to criminal defense, focusing on pretrial motions and case dismissals rather than jury trials.
John Guidry earned both his Juris Doctorate and Master of Business Administration from St. Louis University in 1993. He is a member of the Florida Bar and the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. His practice encompasses the full spectrum of Florida state criminal charges, with a particular emphasis on achieving favorable outcomes through thorough pretrial preparation and motion practice.
Beyond the courtroom, Guidry is a prolific legal educator who has authored over 400 articles on criminal defense topics. He shares his legal expertise through his popular YouTube channel, Instagram, and TikTok accounts, where he has built a substantial following of people eager to learn about the law. His educational content breaks down complex legal concepts into accessible information for the general public.
When not practicing law, Guidry enjoys tennis and pickleball, and loves to travel. Drawing from his background as a former recording studio owner and music video producer in the Orlando area, he brings a creative perspective to his legal practice and continues to apply his passion for video production to his educational content.