DUI Case Results (2021)

Framingham District Court: 1 ^st Offense OUI not guilty after an arrest by the Hopkinton Police Department In this case, our client was charged with OUI after allegedly driving erratically and having his driving reported by a member of the public. He was given field sobriety tests but his physical condition made those tests difficult under any circumstance. Attorney DelSignore was able to argue that the judge should put little stock in the field tests given to someone that would not have good balance under any circumstances. In this case, there was no evidence at trial of bad driving despite there being some indications of driving issues in the report. It is important to understand that the evidence at trial often can be different from the police report. That is one of the common mistakes that are made in resolving cases by plea too quickly. In this case, out client was found not guilty of OUI.

Quincy District Court: Norwell State police arrest not guilty after trial In this case, our client was stopped for speeding. He was not from the US so had issues communicating with the officer; at trial, Attorney DelSignore pointed out that the officer did not report any issues with balance and coordination. Further, the officer testified on cross examination that the client was polite and cooperative as well as alert during the booking process. During closing argument, Attorney DelSignore argued that there were not major indicators of impairment and that the standard of reasonable doubt was not met, even though the officer was justified in making the arrest. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty of the OUI charge.

1 ^st Offense OUI not guilty in Framingham District After arrest by the Hopkinton Police Department In this case, our client was arrested for OUI and stopped after a report from a caller about his driving. At trial, the officer testified that the client failed the field sobriety tests, had slurred speech and that there was an odor of alcohol. The officer also testified that in his opinion the defendant appear drunk. At trial, Attorney DelSignore presented evidence that the client's physical condition would make the Field sobriety tests difficult for him. Given his physical issues, it was argued that the field tests should not be given any credence at all in deciding the case. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty of OUI.

Fitchburg District Court: CDL License holder arrested by the State Police found not guilty after trial In this case, our client was a commercial driver and was charged with OUI by the State police. The client faced a potential one year license loss if convicted as CDL holders face enhanced penalties regardless of whether they are operating a commercial vehicle at the time of the arrest. In this case, the officer testified that the defendant drove erratically and was unsteady on his feet nearly falling over when getting out of the car. At trial, Attorney DelSignore pointed out that this observations was inconsistent with other observations during the encounter where the defendant showed good balance. Attorney DelSignore argued that problems with balance do not normally come and go with related to alcohol. In addition, he pointed out other signs inconsistent with impairment. After trial, the client was found not guilty.

Plymouth District Court: 1 ^st Offense OUI arrest by the Duxbury Police Not Guilty after trial In this case, our client was stopped on a summer day after leaving a restaurant and charged with OUI by the Duxbury Police Department. The client had no prior record and had a successful career. She was worried about how this would impact her future and contemplated accepting a CWOF, the standard plea for OUI. After reviewing the case with her, Attorney DelSignore suggested that going to trial was the best option. It is important for those charged with OUI to understand that trials are not major public events, but in small courtrooms, usually empty. After learning about what a trial would consist of, the defendant elected a trial. At trial, Attorney DelSignore pointed out that the client did not display any major sign of impairment and did very well on the field sobriety tests. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty of OUI.

Stoughton District Court: 1 ^st Offense OUI not guilty after arrest by the Canton Police Department In this case, our client was arrested by the Canton Police Department. The officer claimed that the defendant was speeding and nearly struck the curb. This nearly striking something is very common in police reports and nothing to be alarmed by if you are charged. Nearly striking means nothing actually happened. Often, there is no mention in the police report about any skidding or evasive movement of other drivers. Further, in this case on cross examination, counsel was able to get the officer to admit that the client substantially performed the field sobriety tests. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty.

Taunton District Court: 2 ^nd offense OUI at Roadblock not guilty after trial In this case, our client was stopped at a State police sobriety check point. These are generally very winnable cases at trial as there is no evidence of unsafe or erratic driving. In this case, Attorney DelSignore emphasized the inconsistency in that the officer allowed the client to drive into the screening area with the opinion that there were serious signs of impairment. Further, Attorney DelSignore was able to get the State Trooper to concede that in many respects the defendant performed well on the field sobriety tests. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty of OUI, avoiding a 2 year license loss.

New Bedford District Court: 1 ^st Offense OUI arrest by the State police not guilty after trial In this case, our client was stopped for OUI by the State police after going through a stop sign in New Bedford. The client pulled over immediately showing that the client was paying attention to traffic conditions. At trial, Attorney DelSignore argued that given the late hour and lack of traffic on the road the traffic infraction was understandable and possibly not related to alcohol. Further, he pointed out that the defendant's behavior, appearance and demeanor was inconsistent with someone impaired. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty of OUI.

Dedham District Court: 1 ^st Offense OUI dismissed on trial date In this case, our client's case was dismissed as the Commonwealth was not ready for trial.

Waltham District Court: OUI drugs dismissed In this case, our client was charged with OUI drugs; Attorney DelSignore was able to work out a resolution where the OUI drugs charged was dismissed in exchange for a plea on the negligent driving charge.

Concord District Court: 1 ^st offense OUI not guilty after trial after arrested by the Concord Police Department In this case, our client was stopped for going through a red light by the Concord Police. It was alleged that he smelled of alcohol, had slurred speech and failed field sobriety tests. At trial, Attorney DelSignore challenged the officer’s opinion and pointed out that the field tests are difficult for anyone to do every if they have no alcohol. Additionally, Attorney DelSignore showed a video of the client not having any balance issues during booking. During closing argument, he argued that this inconsistency in the evidence created a reasonable doubt. After trial, the client was found not guilty.

Dedham District Court: 2 ^nd offense OUI not guilty after Jury Trial In this case, our client was arrested by the Norwood police and charged with OUI. It was alleged that the client had an expired registration and was weaving within the lane. The officer further claimed that the client failed field sobriety tests. At trial, Attorney DelSignore stressed that weaving in the lane is not a traffic infraction. The client was a very tall and during trial Attorney DelSignore pointed out there was likely no one at any of the officer’s training my clients height. Attorney DelSignore argued that these standard field tests were not designed to fit someone like the client in this case and despite that he did very well on the tests. Further, Attorney DelSignore emphasized that the lack of any serious erratic driving makes the Commonwealth’s case very difficult to prove. A jury is instructed that the Commonwealth does not need unsafe or erratic driving to prove an OUI charge, but this does not lessen the importance of the evidence. After a brief deliberation of less than 20 minutes, my client was found not guilty of OUI. This was a major victory preserving his citizenship status and avoiding a two year license loss.

Attleboro District Court: 1 ^st Offense OUI arrest with accident by the North Attleboro Police not guilty after trial In this case, my client was charged with OUI after a car accident. At trial, a civilian witness testified that she was involved in an accident with my client and smelled alcohol. She described my client’s actions following the accident. The officer testified that my client had an odor of alcohol, bloodshot glassy eyes and slurred speech. The officer also testified that my client failed field sobriety tests. At trial, Attorney DelSignore pointed out that the odor could not have been strong if it was not smelled in the booking area and that the client performed very well on the field sobriety tests. Attorney DelSignore argued that the client basically based the field sobriety tests so those results create an inconsistency between the argument that the defendant was impaired. In other words, all of the evidence does not line up. When evidence does not line up, there should be reasonable doubt. In this case, the defendant was found not guilty after trial as Attorney DelSignore’s argument was credited and the client acquitted of OUI.

Quincy District Court: 2 ^nd Offense with civilian witness involved in an accident not guilty after trial In this case, our client was involved in a rear end accident. The complaining witness was very interested in the case and appeared in court. Despite wanting to hurt our client at trial, Attorney DelSignore was able to use her testimony to show reasonable doubt. It is important to always figure out how a witness can help the case even if it seems as though the witness will offer no useful evidence. Usually there is a way to attack a witness that will help the defense establish reasonable doubt. After trial, the client was found not guilty, avoiding a substantial license loss associated with a second offense.

Framingham District Court: OUI 1 ^st offense arrest by the Sudbury Police not guilty after Trial In this case, our client was charged with OUI 1 ^st offense by the Sudbury police and the case was heard in the Framingham District Court. In this case, the officer alleged that the client appeared unsteady, had some of the common signs of impairment like, bloodshot glassy eyes, had an odor of alcohol and appeared unsteady on his feet. At trial, Attorney DelSignore argued that since there was no evidence of erratic driving, that the subjective observations of the officer would not be enough to overcome the presumption of innocence and to show that alcohol impaired the client's ability to drive safely. When there is no bad driving, Attorney DelSignore likes to argue as he did in this case that safe driving shows that the individual was not impaired by alcohol. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty of OUI.

Ayer District Court: OUI 1st offense arrest by the State Police case Dismissed In this case, our client had his case dismissed after the Commonwealth was unable to proceed with trial on the trial date set by the Court.

Malden District Court: 1 ^st Offense OUI not guilty after trial In this our client was stopped for OUI after allegedly committing a marked lane violation; the officer stated in the report that the client admitted to consuming 2 glasses of wine and that the officer smelled a moderate odor of alcohol. The officer claimed that the defendant could not hold his foot up past 5 seconds. At trial, Attorney DelSignore argued that a moderate odor of alcohol is consistent with someone that has not consumed too much alcohol. Further, during cross examination, Attorney DelSignore pointed out many signs inconsistent with the conclusion that the defendant was impaired. Further, some gaps in the memory of the officer were important to show that if the client was impaired the officer would have had a better memory of the incident. After trial, the client was found not guilty.

Dedham District Court: OUI 2 ^nd offense not guilty after Jury Trial In this case, our client was stoped on the side of the road. The State trooper claimed that our client was very unsteady on his feet and that there was a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot and glassy eyes and that he spoke with slurred speech. At trial, the Commonwealth was allowed to admit receipts allegedly showing what the client drank that was found in his pocket. The trial judge should not have allowed this evidence in as it was hearsay. During closing argument, Attorney DelSignore told the jury that they should not believe the receipt showed what he drank and that he purchased the alcohol for others at the bar. Attorney DelSignore argued that the testimony of the officer was not consistent with extreme intoxication as the Commonwealth was arguing by relying on the receipts. After trial, the jury found the client not guilty.

Cambridge District Court 1st Offense OUI not guilty after trial In this case, our client who had plans to attend medical school was stopped for driving too slow and making several marked lane violations. The officer alleged her eyes were bloodshot and glassy and speech was slurred. At trial, the district attorney tried to argue that she was wearing all over the road. However, the officer never testified to that so Attorney DelSignore argued that the driving infraction was a typical situation of someone not paying close enough attention to the road and not a sign of impairment. Further, Attorney DelSignore pointed out that many of the typical clues of impairment were not observed by the officer. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty.

Wrentham District Court: OUI 1 ^st Offense dismissed for Military Veteran under the Brave Act

Plymouth District Court: OUI 2 ^nd offense dismissed after the Commonwealth was not ready for trial.

Brockton District Court: OUI 1 ^st offense plea vacated In this case, Attorney DelSignore filed a motion to vacate a plea based on the Alcotest 9510 litigation. The motion was allowed and the defendant was allowed to withdraw his plea.

Falmouth District Court: OUI 1 ^st offense plea vacated In this case, the defendant was charged with a second offense OUI but his first offense involved a case where he took a breath test. Attorney DelSignore was able to get the prior offense vacated to reduce the current charge to a 1st Offense.

Barnstable District Court: Breath Test Refusal Appeal overturned client avoids 3 years license suspension.

Edgartown District Court: OUI Offense dismissed In this case, our client had an OUI charged dismissed. This was an old OUI case where a warrant issued and the case was eventually dismissed by the Court.

Dudley District Court: 1st OUI not guilty after trial for Commercial Driver CDL holder In this case, our client was stopped for speeding by the Webster, Massachusetts police department and charged with OUI. The officer alleged that the he smelled a strong odor of alcohol and that the client had bloodshot glassy eyes. The officer claimed that the client failed field sobriety tests indicating impairment. At trial, Attorney DelSignore emphasized that the driving did not reflect impairment as speeding is very common and not exclusively a sign of alcohol impairment. Further, on the field sobriety tests, Attorney DelSignore stressed that the client did numerous things right that was inconsistent with the performance of an impaired person. After trial, the defendant was found to guilty. The client had a CDL license so the client avoided a one year license loss of his CDL license.

Milford District Court: OUI dismissed on trial date In this case, Attorney DelSignore had a second offense OUI dismissed on the trial date as the Commonwealth was not ready to proceed with trial.

Attleboro District Court: OUI 3rd Offense not guilty after trial In this case, our client was charged with a 3rd offense OUI by the North Attleboro police department. The client was stopped for a headlight infraction and requested to perform field sobriety tests. At trial, Attorney DelSignore pointed out how the officer did not see numerous signs of impairment, including slurred speech or any driving suggesting impairment. Further, Attorney DelSignore was able to show that in many respects the client performed appropriately on the field sobriety exercises. After trial, the client was found not guilty avoiding a 8 year license loss for a third offense and mandatory jail time.

Attleboro District Court: OUI drugs not guilty after trial In this case, our client was arrested and charged with OUI drugs. These cases are very difficult for the Commonwealth to prove; in this case, the Commonwealth tried to allege that because the defendant responded to Narcan he was under the influence of heroin. However, Attorney DelSignore objected to this testimony as an expert would be required to testify to prove to the court that only someone under the influence would respond to narcan. This was a key issue of evidence in the case. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty.

Framingham District Court: OUI 2nd offense not guilty after trial In this case, the defendant was arrested by the Natick police department; after trial the court found that the Commonwealth failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt and the defendant was found not guilty after a one car accident.

Barnstable District Court: 3 year Breath test refusal suspension overturned by Court In this case, Attorney DelSignore was able to have a three year breath test refusal suspension overturned after an appeal to the District Court.

Brighton District Court: 1st Offense OUI for CDL holder not guilty after trial In this case, the defendant was arrested for OUI by the State police Brighton Barracks. The defendant was alleged to have committed marked lane violations on Solider Field Road. The officer further alleged that the defendant was uncooperative and failed 3 field sobriety tests. At trial, Attorney DelSignore emphasized the bumpy and difficulty of traveling on the narrow roads in and and around Soldiers Field Road and Storrow Drive. During Cross examination, Attorney DelSignore pointed out many signs inconsistent with impairment on the field exercises and showed that the defendant did not display consistent signs of impairment as he did not act under the influence during the booking process. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty of OUI. The defendant had a Commercial Drivers License avoiding a potential one year license loss for his CDL.

Quincy District Court: 1st offense OUI not guilty for Nursing Student after Trial In this case, out client was arrested for OUI by the State Police Milton Barracks and the case was heard in the Quincy District Court. The State Trooper alleged that the defendant was operating too slow consistent with someone impaired by alcohol and that she displayed slurred speech, bloodshot and glassy eyes and had a strong odor of alcohol. While in the police report the officer claimed the client failed the field sobriety tests, at trial he made many admissions that the client performed well and followed instructions. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty of OUI.

1st Offense OUI Concord District Court not guilty, with breath test .12 In this case, the defendant was charged with OUI by the Concord police department. The defendant was found off of the road and was alleged to have had an odor of alcohol, slurred speech and to have been unsteady on his feet. At trial, the officer acknowledged that the defendant's unsteadiness could have been caused by his age and the weather conditions. Attorney DelSignore presented many other alternative explanations for the signs that the officer concluded showed impairment. This was all used to establish that there was reasonable doubt in the case and the defendant was found not guilty after trial.

1st Offense OUI Framingham District Court not guilty after trial In this case, the defendant was charged with a first offense OUI after allegedly driving under the solid double yellow line. The officer testified that the defendant's driving showed signs of impairment. The key to establishing reasonable doubt was that the client performed well on the field sobriety exercises. The defendant was found not guilty after trial.

2nd Offense Worcester District Court not guilty after trial In this case, the client was charged with a second offense by the State Police Milbury Barracks. The client had the keys in the ignition but was not technically driving in the normal sense. The Commonwealth can prove a case of OUI based merely on the keys being in the ignition. However, these cases generally make stronger case for trial as there is no evidence of bad driving. In this case, the lack of bad driving was critical to the defendant being found not guilty. Attonrey DelSignore was also able to keep prejudicial evidence out based on an evidentiary objection. After trial, the defendant was fond not guilty.

Plymouth Country: OUI 1st Offense dismissed after a finding of no Probable Cause In this case, DelSignore Law was able to convince a clerk magistrate not to issue a complaint for OUI based on the lack of probable cause and our client's positive life steps after the incident. It is difficult to convince a clerk not to issue a criminal complaint on an OUI offense, but client that are proactive in treatment give themselves a chance in the right case.

Bristol County District Court: 1st OUI Complaint dismissed after a finding of no Probable Cause When an individual is not placed under arrest for OUI or any type of crime, the person is entitled to a clerk hearing to determine if there is probable cause to issue the criminal complaint. In this case, the clerk found that there was no probable cause after listening to legal arguments put forth by our office at DelSignore Law. The client avoided any OUI charge on her record.

Edgartown District Court: OUI charge dismissed In this case, my client was arrested for OUI while on Martha's Vineyard and was stopped by the Edgartown Police Department. The client was alleged to have admitted a strong odor of alcohol, slurred his speech and failed field sobriety tests. After negotiation with the prosecutor, Attorney DelSignore was able to obtain a dismissal of the OUI charge in exchange for a plea on the negligent operation.

Uxbridge DIstrict Court: OUI 2nd offense not guilty after trial In this case, our client was charged with a second offense OUI by the State police and the case was heard in Uxbridge District Court. At trial, the officer claimed that the defendant was speeding and crossing the marked lanes. Further, the officer alleged that the defendant was unable to keep his balance on the field sobriety tests, repeatedly stating that the client nearly fell over. During cross examination, Attorney DelSignore emphasized that the freezing cold weather made the field tests almost impossible to do under any conditions. Further, while inside, during the booking process, the officer did not observe any signs of impairment. This was a key inconsistency in the evidence. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty of OUI.

Milford District Court: 1st Offense OUI not guilty after Trial after arrest by the Upton Police Department In this case, our client was arrested for OUI after being stopped for speeding. Cases involving merely allegations of speeding can be some of the strongest cases for the defense. This case Attorney DelSignore was able to successfully argue that speed is not reflective of someone being under the influence of alcohol as speeding is a common traffic infraction. Further, while the officer wrote in the report that the client did not perform as instructed on the 9 step and one leg stand, Attorney DelSignore listed the number of things that the client did correctly on the test. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty of OUI as the evidence proven through cross examination revealed too many inconsistencies with someone under the influence of alcohol.

Stoughton District Court OUI 1st offense not guilty after an arrest by the Stoughton police In this case, our client was arrested for OUI by the Stoughton police after an accident. it was alleged that our client had bloodshot and glassy eyes, slurred speech and hius answers to basic questions did not make sense. At trial, Attorney DelSignore emphasized that despite the officers claim that the client failed field sobriety tests, that the client actually did many things right on the exercises. Attorney DelSignore pointed out how the client did many of the things the officer is taught to look for in his training. During Closing argument, Attorney DelSignore argued that the Commonwealth could not meet its burden of proof given the many inconsistency between how someone would act if they were imparied and how the defendant performed on the field tests. After trial, the client was found not guilty of OUI.

Westboro District Court: 1st offense OUI not guilty after an arrest by the State Police In this case, our client was charged with a 1st offense OUI after an arrest by the State police. It was alleged that our client drove erratically, almost causing an accident. The trooper testified the client failed field sobriety exercises, spoke with slurred speech and was unsteady on his feet. At trial, the officer's testimony differed from his police report, making the incident sound more serious than previously stated in his report. At trial, Attorney DelSignore confronted the officer with his report to show that if his trial testimony were true, it would have been in the police report. In this case, our client testified as well that he did not believe he was under the influence of alcohol and rebutted key aspects of the officer's testimony. After trial, the client was found not guilty of a 1st offense OUI.

Westboro District Court: 1st offense not guilty after arrested by the Westboro Police Department In this case, our client was charged with OUI after an arrest by the Westboro police. A civilian witness detailed our client's driving indicating that she thought the client was driving erratically. The officer testified that the client failed field sobriety tests and that he formed the opinion that the defendant was impaired. At trial, Attorney DelSignore pointed out discrepancies between what the civilian and the officer said on the witness stand. Further, on cross examination, the officer was shown not to understand the clues on the field sobriety tests. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty of OUI.

Haverhill District Court: 1st Offense OUI not guilty after an accident and testimony of civilian witness. In this case, our client was arrested for OUI and charged by the Haverhill Police Department. It was alleged that the client was impaired as a result of a car accident. The Commonwealth presented the testimony of a civilian witness who described the accident and the defendant's demeanor after the accident. The officer testified he formed the opinion that the defendant was impaired based on his observations and the results of the field sobriety tests. At trial, Attorney DelSignore pointed out the lack of evidence of what his client had to drink, and fact that the officer could not detail his observations with particularity. Additionally, Attorney DelSignore stressed the fact that the client substantially performed the nine step walk and turn. Attorney DelSignore emphasized the high burden of proof required to find someone guilty of OUI; after trial, the Client was found not guilty.

Westborough District Court: 1st Offense OUI not guilty after arrest by Shrewsbury Police Department In this case, Attorney DelSignore client was arrested for OUI by the Shrewsbury police after an officer claimed that the defendant was crossing the fog line and committing marked lane violations. The officer testified that the defendant had bloodshot glassy eyes, a strong odor of alcohol, slurred speech and that he failed the field sobriety exercises. At trial, Attorney DelSignore stressed the lack of evidence including the lack of evidence as to when he consumed alcohol and the failure to investigate other causes of the observations other than alcohol. Attorney DelSignore argued that thought the officer was justified in making the stop and arrest, that the evidence did not rise to the level of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. After trial, the client was found not guilty both of OUI and Negligent operation.

1st Offense OUI not guilty out of the Westboro District Court In this case, my client was charged with OUI by the Southborough police department and the case was heard in the Westboro District Court. My client was stopped for allegedly crossing the fog line. The officer claimed that the client had slurred speech, bloodshot and glassy eyes and failed field sobriety tests. At trial, Attorney DelSignore impeached the officer's recollection of the incident and showed that the officer's memory of the incident was not precise. Further, he pointed out that the officer did not properly score the field tests, failing to give the client credit for what he did correct that was inconsistent with the officer's opinion. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty of OUI.

Fitchburg District Court OUI 2nd offense not guilty after trial In this case, our client was charged with OUI after an accident where she was charged by the Bolton police department. The defendant was alleged to have had slurred speech, bloodshot and glassy eyes and been unsteady on her feet. Attorney DelSignore argued that the lack of field sobriety testing was a key factor that showed reasonable doubt. Further, she argued that the accident could have caused what the officer perceived as signs of impairment. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty of a Second offense OUI.

New Bedford 1st Offense OUI with a .08 breath test not guilty after trial In this case, our client was arrested by the State police and charged with OUI. He was alleged to have failed the field sobriety tests, been unsteady on his feet and to have slurred speech. The client took a breath test which was exactly at the legal limit of .08. At trial, the officer tried to embellish the client 's speech by saying he could not understand what he said.

The officer, however, was discredited by Attorney DelSignore on cross examination where he was confronted with his prior testimony that differed from his trial testimony. Additionally, Attorney DelSignore pointed out the margin of error and other factors that make breath tests unreliable. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty of OUI.

OUI 1st offense not guilty after an arrest by the Pepperell Police Department In this case, the client was charged with OUI and brought to Ayer District Court. At trial, the key evidence resulting in a not guilty verdict was that the client's medical records showed that she had an injury that could have impacted her performance on the field sobriety tests. Further, the officer's conduct was partly the cause of the alleged driving infraction. Attorney DelSignore argued that there was no erratic driving in the case and despite some physical limitation that the client performed very well on field sobriety tests. After trial, the client was found not guilty of OUI.

OUI 1st offense out of Ayer District Court dismissed under the Brave Act In this case, Attorney DelSignore represented a member of the military and was able to obtain a diversion of the OUI offense as a result of the client's military service. Helping Veterans gives Attorney DelSignore great pride and the client was able to avoid an OUI conviction by participating in a program arranged by Attorney DelSignore and the VA.

OUI 2nd Offense not guilty out of Ayer District Court In this case, our client was arrested by the Pepperell Police Department for allegedly committing a marked lane violation. The officer testified that the client failed field sobriety tests and displayed signs of impairment, including blood shot glassy eyes, slurred speech and unsteadiness on her feet. At trial. Attorney DelSignore emphasized the lack of any erratic driving and the fact that the client's physical condition and weight could have played a role in her performance on the exercises. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty and was able to reinstate her license prior to the expiration of the three year breath test refusal suspension.

Hardship Granted 3rd offense OUI: In this case, our client sought a hardship on a third offense OUI. Attorney DelSignore filed a motion for a early hardship with the Board of Appeals. After a hearing the Board allowed the client to get a limited license allowing him to drive with an ignition interlock device.

Immediate Threat Suspension Vacated before the Board of Appeals after the client was charged with OUI involving a serious motor vehicle accident. The client presented evidence of AA treatment and refraining from drinking resulting in the Board terminating the Immediate Threat Suspension.

Hardship license granted on 3rd offense OUI In this case, our client was suspended for a 3rd offense OUI; DelSignore Law was able to get him an early hardship at the Board of Appeals allowing him to drive to work and maintain his employment.

OUI Drugs dismissed out of the East Brookfield District Court In this case, Attorney DelSignore client was charged with OUI drugs. This is a charge that he has handled numerous times before and was able to convince the prosecutor to dismiss the charge based on the lack of evidence and the strong defense that would have been presented at trial. The client avoided an OUI conviction and resolved the case with a plea on the negligent operation charge.

OUI dismissed under the Brace Act for Military Veteran out of Framingham District Court In this case, our client was in the military and we were able to have the case diverted from normal prosecution under the Brave Act. This is an Act that we have used frequently as the legislature created it to give those who served our country a second chance on certain criminal offenses. The person must comply with a treatment plan to have the potential for dismissal. In this case, the client followed our guidance and complied with treatment and was abler to earn a dismissal of a First Offense OUI.

Westboro District Court: OUI drugs brought by the Grafton Police Department not guilty after trial In this case, our client was alleged to be under the influence of drugs, namely depressants. The client was alleged to have driven erratically, failed field sobriety tests and had difficulty with balance. The officer testified to these observations at trial. At trial, Attorney DelSignore argued that the officer's observations were equally consistent with a medical cause and that the evidence was not sufficient to rule out a medical cause of the impairment. Medical records introduced at trial indicated that the client had medical issues that could impact balance. After trial, the defendant was found not guilty.