DUI Andrew Parks has excelled in Tampa DUI defense with his innovative case methods and results. His thorough understanding of DUI law and individualized approach to each case demonstrate his expertise and dedication to his client’s defense.

Parks’ meticulous evidence analysis is persuasive. For example, he contested the arrest based on a faulty breathalyzer. In his careful analysis of maintenance records, Parks found that the arresting device failed its monthly calibration test. This oversight suppressed the breathalyzer findings, hurting the prosecution’s case and favoring his client.

Parks used witness testimony well in another case. He represented a client accused of DUI following a minor traffic collision. Parks called multiple witnesses to testify that the client was not impaired before the accident. He also questioned the arresting officer’s interpretation of the field sobriety test, which was given under poor conditions and contributed to the client’s apparent lack of coordination.

Parks also excels at complex cases involving prior DUI offenses. Parks represented a client with two DUI convictions facing harsh penalties under Florida’s strict DUI laws in a problematic case. By thoroughly studying the client’s past convictions, parks found procedural problems and doubtful evidence in the client’s past convictions. This helped him to negotiate a better plea that decreased the client’s term and avoided the worst punishments for repeat offenders.

Parks is dedicated to ethical client representation in addition to his legal expertise. He pursues all legal options, from pre-trial motions to appeals. This holistic approach covers DUI’s personal and professional effects and a compelling defense. For an experienced driver, losing a license would have ended his career.

Parks is recognized for his proactive DUI defenses, frequently requiring early intervention. In one case, he hired a forensic toxicologist to dispute state-reported BAC levels. The expert testimony showed that the BAC test’s timing and the client’s metabolic variables may have distorted the results, overestimating impairment at arrest.