DUI Case Results Massachusetts OUI Lawyer DelSignore Law other mixed anxiety disorder icd 10

Not guilty OUI 1st offense out of the brockton district court after an arrest by bridgewater police department in this case, our client was charged for OUI after being stopped for speeding 15 miles over the social anxiety meaning in hindi speed limit. Whenever a case starts with a stop for speeding, that is a strong start to the case, because lack of erratic driving is something we can effectively use to create reasonable doubt. The defendant was alleged to have a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot and glassy eyes, and slurred speech. The officer claimed that the defendant performed poorly on the one leg stand and nine step walk and turn. Breath test evidence of .19 was excluded from evidence prior to trial and not considered as part of the evidence.


At trial, we used an edited version of the booking from the bridgewater police department to show that the defendant did not have slurred speech and rebut any claims of being unsteady, as she maintained perfect balance throughout the booking process. Further, attorney delsignore attacked the reliability of the field exercises, as an error on the field exercises does not mean that at a person is impaired given the exercises are unfamiliar to the person. It was argued that based on the stress and anxiety of the being confronted by a police officer, it is natural for someone to make some errors on the exercises. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty of OUI. Date: november 5, 2018 category: OUI ACCIDENTS

Not guilty 1st offense OUI out of the westboro district court in this case, my was charged with a first offense OUI by the state police and charged in the westboro district court. The case was ultimately transferred to worcester district court for trial. At trial, the officer alleged that the client committed three marked lane violations and nearly struck the guardrail. The officer testified that the client failed all of the field sobriety tests and smelled of a strong odor of alcohol and had glassy significado de anoxia eyes. At trial, attorney delsignore crossed examined the officer who conceded the driving may have been caused by the defendant eating while driving and not being impaired by alcohol. The officer testified that the client showed good balance in the instruction stance, walked a straight line and took the correct number of steps on the nine step walk and turn. Attorney delsignore argued that everything the client did right was inconsistent with impairment. The client was found not guilty of OUI after trial date: november 1, 2018 category: OUI ACCIDENTS october 2018

OUI under 21 client found not guilty in taunton district court in this case, our client was under 21 and charged with OUI. Following our advice, the client enrolled in the youth alcohol program reducing the license suspension for under 21 drivers. However, a conviction for someone under 21 would result in an additional 210 day suspension. The case proceeded to trial. At trial, attorney delsignore presented pictures showing that the area of the alleged mark lane violation was one where drivers would naturally cross the lanes for a second based on the way the road was constructed. Attorney delsignore cross examined the officer and demonstrated that the nanoxia ncore client dismayed many signs inconsistent with being under the influence. During cross examination, the officer conceded that the client performed many steps of the nine step and one leg stand correctly. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty of OUI, avoiding an additional license loss for being under 21. Date: october 4, 2018 category: OUI ACCIDENTS september 2018

Brockton district court, 3rd offense OUI not guilty after arrest by the bridgewater police department in this case, our client was charged with a 3rd offense OUI, which carries a minimum mandatory six month jail sentence. The commonwealth alleged that the defendant was under the influence of both alcohol and marijuana. This case involves complex evidentiary issues of law. At trial, attorney delsignore was able to preclude the officer from testifying to his opinion that the defendant was impaired by marijuana based on the officer’s lack of training and the case of commonwealth v. Gerhardt, where attorney delsignore and gaudreau wrote a brief assisting the defendant in that case given the statewide importance of the issue in the gerhardt case for all defendants charged with any crime of driving under the influence of drugs, especially anoxia refers to marijuana. Attorney delsignore crossed examined all three officers, showing that the client did not exhibit signs of impairment. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty of OUI 3rd offense. Date: september 27, 2018 category: OUI ACCIDENTS

Dedham district court 2nd offense OUI arrest by the westwood police department not guilty after trial in this case, our client was charged with a second offense OUI after allegedly driving over the marked lanes in westwood. The officer alleged that the defendant failed the field sobriety tests, including the nine step walk and turn, alphabet and one leg stand. At trial, attorney delsignore used a picture of the area and showed that the officer did the field tests in a very difficult area for anyone to perform well. During the cross examination it was also pointed out things that the client did correctly. When officers write their reports and testify at trial, they omit signs that do not show impairment. During this trial and every other trial, attorney delsignore highlights those positive nanda nursing diagnosis for hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy points. In this case, an edited video was played showing that the defendant did not look impaired by alcohol. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty of both OUI 2nd offense and negligent operation. Date: september 25, 2018 category: OUI ACCIDENTS

Wrentham district court OUI 1st offense client found not guilty after being arrested by the norfolk police department in this case, our client was arrested for OUI by the norfolk police department. The client worked at a hospital so could not afford any time of conviction or admission on the OUI charge. The officer claimed that the client drove at a high rate of speed and failed to yield. The officer alleged that the defendant had a strong odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, and slurred speech, as well as being unsteady getting out of the car. The officer further testified that the defendant failed the field sobriety tests. At trial, attorney delsignore objected when the officer tried to enter into evidence that the defendant refused to answer a questions about alcohol consumption. A defendant is under no obligation to answer questions and admission of this testimony would violate the privilege against self-incrimination as an attempt to shift the burden to a defendant. Additionally, attorney delsignore cross-examined the officer on his report which appeared to suggest that the defendant balanced for 30 seconds on the one leg stand. The officer conceded some favorable points about the defendant being polite, cooperative, alert during the booking process. All of these statements on cross-examination showed reasonable doubt. The client was found not guilty of the OUI charge. The client avoided any license loss or criminal conviction. Date: september 18, 2018 category: OUI ACCIDENTS

OUI 1st offense out of the attleboro district court not definicion de anorexia wikipedia guilty after trial in this case, my client was arrested for OUI after being stopped for speeding. The officer alleged that he smelled an odor of alcohol, that she had bloodshot and glassy eyes as well as slow speech. The officer administered the standard field tests, the 9 step walk and turn and one leg stand test, and concluded that the defendant showed signs of impairment. The defendant submitted to a breath test of .09 and was placed under arrest. At trial, the breath test did not come into evidence based on problems with the breath test and litigation that the defendant had been joined to earlier by attorney delsignore. At trial, attorney delsignore showed that the defendant did many things inconsistent with someone under the influence of alcohol. She did not appear under the influence in the booking video; did many things correct on the field tests including keeping her foot up the correct height, starting on time and not missing heel to toe on the 9 step. The officer claimed that she missed some steps but when showed the report the officer acknowledged that he did not include that detail in the police report. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty. Date: september 11, 2018 category: OUI ACCIDENTS

Plymouth district court not guilty OUI second offense after arrest by the duxbury police department civilian called police stating she observed client acting strangely, that she believed he was drunk and that she had seen him driving. Police respond and observe client hypoxic anoxic injury in his underwear. Responding officer testified client had bloodshot eyes slurred speech and that he failed the field sobriety tests. Officer also testified client admitted to drinking awhile ago. At trial attorney gaudreau was able to show that client had a history of sleepwalking and his odd behavior was a result of that rather than alcohol. She was also able to cross exam the officer who was present during the booking process at the duxbury police station. That officer stated that he had not recorded the same observations as the original officer. Attorney gaudreau also submitted the booking video and photo that showed that the defendant had good balance and did not have bloodshot eyes. The jury found client not guilty. Date: august anxiety attack meaning in tagalog 2, 2018 category: OUI ACCIDENTS july 2018

Dedham district court not guilty OUI after car accident with injuries in this case, our client was charged with OUI by the norwood police department after a one car accident, where the victim was injured from the crash, and went to the hospital. At trial, the victim testified that the client was speeding and on the wrong side of the road. The officer testified that the client failed field sobriety tests and had bloodshot and glassy eyes. At trial, our client testified about his day and the fact that he did not feel under the influence of alcohol, that he was nervous on the field tests and tried to understand everything perfectly so asked questions. On cross examination, attorney delsignore pointed out that the defendant basically passed the nine step walk and turn; reluctantly the officer agrees that the client did well on the test. After trial the defendant was found not guilty of OUI but guilty of negligent driving. That was the verdict we were looking in light of the accident to avoid the OUI conviction. Date: july 10, 2018 category: OUI ACCIDENTS