DUI MANSLAUGHTER

Comprehensive Guide to Florida's Most Serious DUI Charge​

UNDERSTANDING DUI MANSLAUGHTER

DUI manslaughter represents one of the most serious criminal charges in Florida. When an allegation arises that drunk driving caused or contributed to the death of another person, the crime is charged as DUI manslaughter under Florida Statute Section 316.193(3)(c)(3). This offense carries severe penalties that can fundamentally alter the trajectory of your life, including mandatory prison time, permanent license revocation, and a felony conviction that follows you forever.

The cases we handle involve single and multiple vehicle collisions, including accidents involving pedestrians, bicycles, motorcycles, commercial motor vehicles, trucks, and automobiles. Each case presents unique challenges that require immediate attention from an attorney who understands not only the law but also the complex scientific evidence that forms the backbone of these prosecutions.

ELEMENTS OF THE OFFENSE

​

To prove DUI manslaughter, the State of Florida must establish three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

First, the defendant was driving or in actual physical control of a vehicle within Florida. The term "actual physical control" means a person must be physically in or on the vehicle and have the capability to operate the vehicle, regardless of whether the person is actually operating the vehicle at the time.

Second, the defendant was under the influence of alcoholic beverages or any chemical or controlled substance when affected to the extent that the person's normal faculties were impaired, or the defendant had a blood-alcohol level of 0.08 or higher. Normal faculties include the ability to see clearly, walk normally, judge distances, drive safely, make sound judgments, and act in emergencies.

Third, as a result of operating the vehicle, the defendant caused or contributed to causing the death of another human being or unborn child. Importantly, Florida law does not require that the defendant's impairment be the sole cause of the death. Any deviation or lack of care on the part of a driver under the influence to which the fatal accident can be attributed will suffice. This represents a lower threshold for causation than many people realize, making the defense of these cases particularly challenging and requiring sophisticated legal strategy.

​

CURRENT PENALTIES AND SENTENCING

Standard DUI Manslaughter (Second Degree Felony)

DUI manslaughter is classified as a second-degree felony under Florida law and carries the following penalties:

Prison: Up to 15 years in Florida State Prison with a mandatory minimum sentence of four years imprisonment. This mandatory minimum cannot be waived or reduced through downward departure, even in cases where the defendant has no prior criminal history.

Fines: Up to $10,000 in fines.

Probation: The court places all offenders convicted of DUI manslaughter on monthly reporting probation.

Criminal Punishment Code: DUI manslaughter is ranked as a Level 8 offense under Florida's Criminal Punishment Code. With points assessed for the death of a single victim, most defendants face over ten years as a minimum sentence on their scoresheet, even with no prior criminal history.

License Revocation: Permanent revocation of driving privileges. While hardship reinstatement may be available after a certain period, the revocation itself is permanent upon conviction.

Enhanced Penalty: DUI Manslaughter with Failure to Render Aid (First Degree Felony)

If the driver knew or should have known that the crash occurred but failed to give information or render aid as required by Florida Statute Section 316.062, the charge is elevated to a first-degree felony with the following enhanced penalties:

Prison: Up to 30 years in Florida State Prison (double the standard DUI manslaughter penalty).

Fines: Up to $10,000.

Criminal Punishment Code: Ranked as a Level 9 offense, the highest level of offense severity in Florida's criminal code.

TRENTON'S LAW: MAJOR CHANGES EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1, 2025

Florida House Bill 687, known as "Trenton's Law," took effect on October 1, 2025, and dramatically reshaped the legal landscape for repeat DUI manslaughter offenders. This legislation represents one of the most aggressive penalty increases in recent Florida history.

Doubled Sentencing Exposure for Repeat Offenders

Under Trenton's Law, any person convicted of DUI manslaughter, BUI (Boating Under the Influence) manslaughter, vehicular homicide, or vessel homicide who has a prior conviction for any of these offenses now faces a first-degree felony charge (elevated from second-degree) with a maximum sentence of 30 years in prison instead of 15 years.

The enhanced penalties apply to defendants with prior convictions for:

• DUI manslaughter under Section 316.193(3)(c)(3)

• BUI manslaughter under Section 327.35(3)(c)(3)

• Vehicular homicide under Section 782.071

• Vessel homicide under Section 782.072

Enhanced Criminal Punishment Code Rankings

The legislation also elevated the offense severity rankings:

• DUI manslaughter with a specified prior conviction: Level 9 (up from Level 8)

• BUI manslaughter with a specified prior conviction: Level 9

• Vehicular homicide with a specified prior conviction: Level 8

• Vessel homicide with a specified prior conviction: Level 8

Important Clarifications About Trenton's Law

The increased penalties only apply to crimes committed on or after October 1, 2025. However, older convictions will count as qualifying prior convictions, even if they occurred decades ago. This means that someone who had a DUI manslaughter conviction from 20 years ago could face the enhanced first-degree felony charge if charged with a new offense after October 1, 2025.

​

Criminalization of Refusal to Submit to Testing

In addition to enhanced DUI manslaughter penalties, Trenton's Law criminalized refusal to submit to chemical testing for the first time in Florida history. Under Florida Statute Section 316.1939, refusal to submit to breath, blood, or urine testing is now a criminal offense, not merely an administrative penalty. Judges are now required to warn arrestees that refusal carries criminal penalties before administering tests.

Importantly, refusal charges are separate from DUI charges. Even if the underlying DUI is dismissed or results in an acquittal, a defendant can still be convicted of the refusal itself. Additionally, refusal convictions are criminal offenses that in most cases cannot be sealed or expunged.

BLOOD DRAWS AND THE FOURTH AMENDMENT: YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS

One of the most frequently litigated issues in DUI manslaughter cases involves the forced extraction of blood without a search warrant. Understanding your constitutional protections is critical, as many cases can be won or lost based on the legality of blood evidence.

The General Rule: Warrants Are Required

The United States Supreme Court established clear Fourth Amendment protections regarding blood draws in DUI cases through a trilogy of landmark decisions.

Missouri v. McNeely (2013) set forth the foundational rule: "In those drunk-driving investigations where police officers can reasonably obtain a warrant before a blood sample can be drawn without significantly undermining the efficacy of the search, the Fourth Amendment mandates that they do so." The Court rejected the argument that the natural dissipation of alcohol in the bloodstream alone creates a per se exigency that justifies every warrantless blood draw in every DUI case. Instead, exigent circumstances must be determined case by case based on the totality of circumstances.

Birchfield v. North Dakota (2016) further clarified that while breath tests may be conducted without a warrant under the search-incident-to-arrest exception, blood tests generally require a warrant. The Court emphasized that blood draws are significantly more intrusive than breath tests and cannot be justified under the same exception to the warrant requirement.

Mitchell v. Wisconsin (2019) addressed the specific scenario of unconscious drivers. The Court held that while a warrantless blood test would almost always be permitted when the driver is unconscious and unable to submit to a breath test, it did not create a per se rule. The defendant must still have an opportunity to show that blood would not have been drawn but for police seeking BAC information and that obtaining a warrant would not have interfered with other pressing duties.

Florida's Statutory Scheme for Blood Draws

Florida Statute Section 316.1933(1)(a) provides that if a law enforcement officer has probable cause to believe that a motor vehicle driven by or in the actual physical control of a person under the influence of alcoholic beverages or chemical substances has caused the death or serious bodily injury of a human being, a law enforcement officer shall require the person to submit to a blood test.

However, this statutory authorization must still comply with Fourth Amendment requirements. Florida's implied consent statute does not override constitutional protections established by the Supreme Court. Law enforcement cannot forcibly take a blood sample without meeting one of three requirements:

1. A Valid Search Warrant: The officer must obtain a warrant from a judge based on probable cause.

2. Free and Voluntary Consent: The suspect must give actual, informed consent. Importantly, implied consent under Florida's driving statutes is insufficient to satisfy Fourth Amendment requirements. Courts have consistently found that an unconscious person cannot give free and voluntary consent.

3. Exigent Circumstances: The officer must demonstrate that specific circumstances made obtaining a warrant impractical or impossible. The mere fact that alcohol dissipates in the bloodstream is not sufficient.

Proving Exigent Circumstances: The State's Burden

When law enforcement conducts a warrantless blood draw, the burden falls on the State to prove by clear and convincing evidence that exigent circumstances existed. Courts will consider:

• Whether the officer made any attempt to contact the on-call assistant State Attorney

• Whether the officer attempted to determine which judge might be available to review a warrant application

• How long it would take to obtain a warrant given modern technology (electronic warrant applications via email or phone)

• Whether the officer had other pressing duties, such as:

  • Managing an accident scene with ongoing hazards

  • Coordinating emergency medical responses

  • Dealing with multiple victims or suspects

  • Addressing public safety concerns

• Whether the suspect required immediate medical intervention

• The timing of when officers became aware a blood draw would be necessary

The advent of modern technology has made obtaining warrants significantly faster and easier. Many jurisdictions now allow electronic warrant applications, and judges are available on-call. As a result, courts have become increasingly skeptical of exigency claims when officers made no attempt to seek a warrant.

Forced Blood Draws Without Warrants: Grounds for Suppression

If law enforcement conducts a warrantless blood draw without establishing exigent circumstances or obtaining valid consent, the blood test results may be suppressed regardless of how meticulously the chain of custody was maintained. Suppression of the blood evidence often results in the State being unable to prove the DUI element of the charge, potentially leading to dismissal or reduction to lesser offenses.

Motions to suppress forced blood draws represent one of the most critical components of DUI manslaughter defense. These motions require detailed evidentiary hearings where the defense can cross-examine the officers about their decision-making process, the availability of warrant procedures, and whether they explored less intrusive alternatives.

Medical Blood Draws: Additional Considerations

Blood drawn for medical purposes (such as in an ambulance or emergency room) presents additional Fourth Amendment issues. Even though medical personnel draw the blood for treatment purposes, if law enforcement later obtains access to that blood or the results without a warrant, consent, or exigent circumstances, the evidence may still be suppressed. Defense attorneys must carefully examine when and how law enforcement gained access to medical blood results and whether proper legal procedures were followed.

COMPREHENSIVE LEGAL DEFENSES

Defending against DUI manslaughter charges requires a multi-layered approach that addresses every aspect of the State's case. The following defenses may be available depending on the specific facts of your case:

1. Challenging the Traffic Stop or Initial Detention

Law enforcement officers may only stop a vehicle for one of two reasons: if the officer has reasonable suspicion that the driver is committing a traffic infraction, or if the officer has probable cause that the driver committed a crime. If the defense can demonstrate that the officer lacked legal justification for the stop, all evidence obtained as a result of that illegal stop must be suppressed. This includes observations of impairment, field sobriety test results, breath or blood test results, and any statements made by the defendant.

2. Suppressing Illegally Obtained Blood Evidence

As discussed extensively above, blood draws conducted without a warrant, without free and voluntary consent, and without genuine exigent circumstances violate the Fourth Amendment. Filing comprehensive motions to suppress blood evidence represents one of the most effective defense strategies in DUI manslaughter cases. Even when blood was drawn, defense counsel must scrutinize the entire process to identify constitutional violations.

3. Causation Defenses: Breaking the Chain

Perhaps the most powerful defense in DUI manslaughter cases involves challenging whether the defendant's impairment actually caused or contributed to the death. Florida law requires the State to prove causation beyond a reasonable doubt. However, causation in DUI manslaughter differs significantly from causation in intentional crimes.

The prosecution must prove that the defendant's operation of the vehicle while impaired was a proximate cause of the death. Proximate cause means a natural, direct, and continuous sequence of events unbroken by any efficient, independent cause. While Florida courts have held that the defendant's conduct need not be the sole cause, the defense can argue that an intervening cause broke the chain of causation.

Examples of intervening causes that may break causation include:

• Another driver's conduct: If a second motorist's reckless or unlawful actions, such as running a red light, constituted the sole proximate cause of the accident, the DUI defendant may not be held responsible for the resulting death.

• Mechanical failure: Unexpected brake failure, tire blowouts, or sudden mechanical defects can create intervening events that disrupt the causal link between the defendant's impairment and the harm.

• Environmental hazards: Debris in the roadway, oil slicks, sudden severe weather conditions, or road defects can constitute independent causes.

• Medical negligence: If the victim initially survives the collision but dies later due to medical malpractice or complications from treatment unrelated to the injuries from the crash, the defense can argue that the death resulted from subsequent medical error rather than the defendant's driving.

• Victim's own actions: In some cases, the victim's conduct may have been a superseding cause. For example, if a pedestrian suddenly darted into traffic without warning in a manner that would have been unavoidable even for a sober driver.

The key to establishing an intervening cause defense lies in hiring qualified accident reconstruction experts who can analyze the physical evidence, including vehicle damage, road conditions, witness statements, and timing of events to demonstrate that factors other than impairment caused the fatal accident.

4. Accident Reconstruction and Independent Investigation

The State conducts its own accident reconstruction to support the charges. However, law enforcement's reconstruction may contain errors, unsupported assumptions, or conclusions that don't align with the physical evidence. Retaining an independent accident reconstruction expert immediately after the incident is critical.

These experts can:

• Analyze vehicle damage patterns

• Examine tire marks and road evidence

• Calculate speeds and impact forces

• Review traffic control devices and road design

• Evaluate sight lines and visibility conditions

• Identify alternative explanations for how the accident occurred

• Challenge the State's expert's methodology and conclusions

Accident reconstruction becomes particularly important when the defense theory is that a sober driver in the same circumstances would have been involved in the same crash. If the accident would have occurred regardless of impairment, causation cannot be established.

5. Challenging Blood Alcohol Content Results

Even when blood evidence is legally obtained, the results themselves can be challenged. Blood testing is a scientific process subject to numerous sources of error:

Chain of custody issues: Every person who handled the blood sample must be identified, and proper protocols must have been followed at each step. Any break in the chain of custody or failure to properly document transfers can call the results into question.

Laboratory procedures: Blood testing laboratories must follow specific protocols for storage, testing, and quality control. Defense attorneys must obtain and review all laboratory documentation to identify:

• Improper calibration of testing equipment

• Failure to use proper controls

• Contamination of samples

• Improper storage temperatures

• Testing by unqualified personnel

• Deviation from standard operating procedures

• Failure to follow manufacturer's guidelines for testing equipment

Fermentation and contamination: Blood samples can ferment if not properly preserved, leading to falsely elevated alcohol readings. Bacterial contamination, improper preservative-to-blood ratios, or delays in testing can all affect results.

Rising blood alcohol: The blood alcohol concentration at the time of testing may differ significantly from the BAC at the time of driving. Alcohol absorption continues after drinking stops, meaning a person's BAC may have been lower while driving than when blood was drawn later. This becomes particularly important when significant time elapses between the accident and the blood draw.

Mr. Bernstein has completed the Science Curriculum at the National College for DUI Defense and has trained at Axion Labs in Chicago, where they train scientists on the instruments used to test and interpret blood results. This specialized training enables him to identify errors in blood testing that other attorneys might miss.

6. Challenging Field Sobriety Tests and Officer Observations

Officers are trained to conduct standardized field sobriety tests according to specific protocols established by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Deviations from these protocols can render the test results unreliable. Additionally, many factors other than alcohol impairment can affect performance on these tests:

• Medical conditions (inner ear problems, knee injuries, back problems)

• Nervousness and anxiety

• Age and physical fitness

• Footwear

• Road surface conditions

• Weather conditions

• Poor lighting

• Distractions at the scene

Similarly, officer observations of "impairment" can often be explained by factors other than intoxication. Red, watery eyes may result from allergies or lack of sleep. Slurred speech might be a medical condition or speech impediment. Confusion at the accident scene is a normal response to trauma.

7. Challenging Breath Test Results

If a breath test was administered in addition to or instead of a blood test, numerous defenses apply:

• Improper calibration or maintenance of the breath testing device

• Failure to observe the defendant for the required observation period

• Mouth alcohol contamination

• Radio frequency interference

• Operator error

• Medical conditions affecting results (diabetes, GERD, certain diets)

• Machine malfunction

8. Proving Lack of Actual Physical Control

In cases where the defendant was not actively driving at the time officers arrived, the State must prove the defendant was in "actual physical control" of the vehicle. This element can be challenged when:

• The defendant was outside the vehicle when discovered

• The keys were not in the ignition

• The engine was not running

• Other individuals may have been driving

• Significant time elapsed between the accident and when defendant was found with the vehicle

9. Miranda Violations and Statement Suppression

Any statements made by the defendant after being placed in custody must be preceded by proper Miranda warnings. If law enforcement questioned the defendant about the accident, impairment, or drinking without first advising the defendant of the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney, those statements must be suppressed.

Additionally, even when Miranda warnings are given, statements may be suppressed if:

• The defendant invoked the right to remain silent or requested an attorney

• The defendant was not in a condition to knowingly and voluntarily waive rights (due to injury, medication, or confusion)

• Officers continued questioning after the defendant invoked rights

• The warnings were inadequate

10. Attacking the Prosecutor's Theory Through Expert Testimony

Defense experts can provide critical testimony to counter the State's case:

• Toxicologists can testify about alcohol absorption and elimination rates, the effects of specific BAC levels, and alternative explanations for test results

• Medical experts can explain injuries, medical conditions, and alternative causes of death

• Accident reconstructionists can demonstrate how the accident occurred and challenge causation

• Forensic pathologists can analyze autopsy reports and provide alternative medical opinions

WHAT TO DO IF YOU ARE INVOLVED IN A FATAL ACCIDENT

If an accident occurs and death results, even days, weeks, or months after the accident, the charge can be elevated to DUI manslaughter. Understanding what happens in the immediate aftermath and taking the right steps can significantly impact the outcome of your case.

Immediate Actions by Law Enforcement

Law enforcement agencies immediately begin an intensive investigation when a fatal accident occurs:

• Accident scene reconstruction: Officers measure and photograph the scene, document road conditions, examine tire marks, document vehicle positions, and collect physical evidence.

• Black box data: The State will subpoena Event Data Recorder (EDR) information from your vehicle, which can record speed, braking, steering, and other data immediately before impact.

• Social media investigation: Law enforcement will subpoena your social media accounts, including Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, and others, looking for posts, photos, or messages that suggest you had been drinking or were impaired.

• Financial records: Officers may subpoena bank and credit card records to establish where you were and whether you made purchases at bars or liquor stores before the accident.

• Surveillance video: Police will seek video footage from businesses, traffic cameras, and residences near where you were before the accident and along your route.

• Witness interviews: Officers will interview anyone who saw you before or during the accident, including passengers in your vehicle, people at establishments you visited, and other drivers.

What You Should Do Immediately

1. Exercise Your Constitutional Rights: You have the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney. Anything you say can and will be used against you. Do not give statements to police about how much you drank, where you were, or what happened. Politely decline to answer questions and request an attorney.

2. Do Not Consent to Searches: While Florida's implied consent law requires you to submit to breath or blood testing or face license suspension, you should not consent to searches of your vehicle, phone, or other property without a warrant.

3. Contact an Attorney Immediately: The most critical decision you will make is hiring an experienced DUI manslaughter defense attorney immediately. Your attorney needs to begin an independent investigation right away, as evidence dissipates with time. Witnesses' memories fade, physical evidence at the scene can be altered or lost, and surveillance video may be deleted.

4. Document Everything: If you are physically able, document your own recollection of events, including what you ate and drank, timeline of the day, weather conditions, road conditions, and your observations. Your attorney will need this information to properly defend you.

Why Immediate Investigation Matters

Evidence in DUI manslaughter cases is highly time-sensitive:

• Road conditions change with weather and repairs

• Skid marks and debris are cleared or fade

• Witnesses move or forget details

• Business surveillance videos are often deleted after 30-90 days

• Vehicle damage can be repaired before proper documentation

• Social media posts can be deleted

Your defense attorney must immediately begin an independent investigation to preserve evidence, interview witnesses, photograph the scene, examine vehicles, and retain experts before critical evidence is lost.

DRIVER'S LICENSE CONSEQUENCES

In addition to criminal penalties, DUI manslaughter conviction carries severe administrative consequences for your driving privileges.

Permanent Revocation

Upon conviction for DUI manslaughter, the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles will permanently revoke your driver's license. Unlike suspensions or other revocations that expire after a set period, a permanent revocation means you lose your driving privilege indefinitely.

Hardship Reinstatement Eligibility

While the revocation is permanent, you may be eligible to apply for hardship reinstatement after a specified period. To be eligible:

• You must complete DUI school before any hardship reinstatement can be considered

• You must wait the required period specified by the court and Florida law

• You must show proof of SR-22 insurance

• You must pay all required fees and fines

• You must demonstrate a genuine hardship (employment, education, medical needs)

• ​

Limitations on Hardship Licenses

Even if granted hardship reinstatement, significant restrictions apply:

• You may only drive for business or employment purposes

• You may be required to maintain an ignition interlock device

• Violation of hardship conditions results in immediate cancellation

• Multiple DUI convictions may make you permanently ineligible for any hardship relief

Administrative Hearing Requirement

In addition to the criminal case, you face an administrative proceeding with the Florida DHSMV. You have only 10 days from the date of arrest to request a formal review hearing to challenge the administrative suspension of your license. Missing this deadline means your license is automatically suspended.

THE IMPORTANCE OF SPECIALIZED DEFENSE

DUI manslaughter cases differ fundamentally from standard DUI cases and even from other homicide cases. They require an attorney with specialized knowledge in multiple disciplines:

Scientific and Technical Expertise

Defense of DUI manslaughter requires understanding complex scientific principles:

• Gas chromatography and blood alcohol testing

• Forensic toxicology and pharmacokinetics

• Accident reconstruction and biomechanics

• Physics of vehicle collisions

• Medical pathology and cause of death determination

Mr. Bernstein has completed the Science Curriculum at the National College for DUI Defense and has trained at Axion Labs in Chicago where they train scientists on the instruments used to test and interpret blood results. This specialized training provides insight into the testing process and how to identify and challenge errors that other attorneys without this background might miss.

Legal Complexity

DUI manslaughter cases involvethe intersection of:

• Criminal law and procedure

• Constitutional law (Fourth Amendment, Fifth Amendment, Miranda rights)

• Florida DUI statutes

• Rules of evidence

• Scientific testimony and expert witness standards

• Sentencing guidelines and Criminal Punishment Code

Strategic Investigation and Case Building

Successful defense requires immediate action on multiple fronts:

• Retaining accident reconstruction experts

• Retaining forensic toxicologists

• Conducting independent witness interviews

• Documenting and photographing the accident scene

• Obtaining surveillance video and records

• Analyzing Event Data Recorder information

• Reviewing medical records and autopsy reports

• Challenging laboratory procedures and documentation

• Filing suppression motions to exclude illegally obtained evidence

• Preparing for complex evidentiary hearings

HOW ALAN S. BERNSTEIN FIGHTS FOR YOUR FREEDOM

When you face DUI manslaughter charges, you are confronting the most serious criminal accusation of your life. A conviction means a mandatory minimum of four years in prison, with potential sentences extending to fifteen or even thirty years under the new Trenton's Law provisions. You face permanent loss of your driver's license, a felony record that follows you forever, and the destruction of everything you have worked to build in your life. At this moment, when the stakes could not be higher, the attorney you choose will determine whether you have a future worth living.

Alan S. Bernstein does not simply react to the State's case. He systematically dismantles it, piece by piece, using specialized scientific knowledge that most criminal defense attorneys simply do not possess. His approach combines aggressive early investigation with technical expertise that allows him to identify weaknesses in the prosecution's case that other lawyers never see.

The Science Makes the Difference

Most criminal defense attorneys can read a police report and understand the basic elements of a DUI charge. Very few can actually understand what happens inside a gas chromatograph when your blood is being tested, identify when a laboratory technician has deviated from proper protocols, or explain to a jury why a blood test showing a specific BAC level is scientifically unreliable. Alan can do all of this because he has invested years in learning the actual science, not just the legal theory.

Alan completed the intensive Science Curriculum at the National College for DUI Defense, where attorneys learn organic chemistry, pharmacokinetics, and forensic toxicology from actual scientists. More importantly, he traveled to Axion Laboratories in Chicago to undergo hands-on training on the actual gas chromatography equipment that laboratories use to analyze blood samples. He did not simply read about these instruments in a manual. He operated them himself, learned their limitations, understood their calibration requirements, and discovered exactly where errors occur in the testing process.

This training allows Alan to review your blood test results with the same level of understanding as the forensic scientist who performed the test. When he examines laboratory documentation, he can identify improper calibration curves, inadequate quality control samples, contamination indicators, and deviations from standard operating procedures that would be invisible to an attorney without this background. He can challenge the State's expert witnesses with specific, technical questions that expose the limitations and potential errors in their analysis. In motion hearings to suppress blood evidence, judges recognize that Alan is not simply making general arguments about blood testing but is presenting specific, scientifically-grounded challenges based on his detailed understanding of the testing process.

Immediate Action Protects Your Case

The moments immediately following a fatal accident represent the most critical period for your defense. Physical evidence at the accident scene changes or disappears within hours. Skid marks fade, debris gets cleared, road conditions change with weather. Witnesses scatter, memories become less precise, and people become harder to locate as days pass. Businesses delete surveillance video after thirty to ninety days. Your vehicle may be repaired or released from evidence. Blood samples may be consumed during testing, leaving nothing for independent analysis.

Alan understands that waiting even a few days can mean losing critical evidence forever. When you retain him, he immediately dispatches investigators to the accident scene to take comprehensive photographs, measure road conditions, document traffic control devices, and identify physical evidence that law enforcement may have missed or documented improperly. He interviews witnesses while their memories remain fresh and before the prosecution has an opportunity to influence their statements. He files preservation letters with businesses to secure surveillance video before automated deletion systems erase it. He arranges for immediate inspection of all vehicles involved in the accident before they are repaired, sold, or destroyed. He retains accident reconstruction experts who can examine the physical evidence while it still exists, not months later when crucial details have been lost.

This aggressive early investigation accomplishes multiple strategic goals. First, it preserves evidence that proves your innocence or undermines the State's theory of causation. Second, it identifies weaknesses in law enforcement's investigation that can be exploited through cross-examination at trial. Third, it demonstrates to prosecutors that they face a formidable defense and that taking your case to trial will require them to overcome serious challenges to their evidence. Prosecutors respect attorneys who do thorough work because they know these cases become much harder to prove when the defense has done its own comprehensive investigation.

Attacking the Blood Evidence at Its Foundation

DUI manslaughter cases live or die on blood evidence. Without proof that you were impaired, the State cannot establish the DUI element of the charge, and without that element, the most they can charge is vehicular homicide or a lesser offense with dramatically reduced penalties. Alan's specialized training in blood alcohol testing gives him unique advantages in attacking this critical evidence.

When law enforcement took your blood without obtaining a search warrant, Alan will file comprehensive motions to suppress that evidence based on Fourth Amendment violations. These motions require detailed evidentiary hearings where he cross-examines the officers about every decision they made. He will establish a timeline showing exactly when the officers arrived at the scene, when they determined a blood draw would be necessary, and how long it would have taken to contact an on-call judge and obtain an electronic warrant. He will demonstrate that the officers never attempted to get a warrant, never contacted the State Attorney's office, and simply assumed they could bypass constitutional requirements based on outdated legal theories that the Supreme Court rejected in McNeely and Birchfield.

In jurisdictions where electronic warrant systems exist, Alan will show that officers could have obtained authorization in as little as fifteen to thirty minutes, destroying any claim of true exigency. He will challenge officers' claims that they had pressing duties that prevented them from seeking a warrant by showing that multiple officers were present at the scene and that obtaining a warrant could have occurred simultaneously with other investigative activities. He will present case law demonstrating that the natural dissipation of alcohol alone does not create the kind of emergency that justifies ignoring the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement.

When blood evidence is not suppressed, Alan shifts to attacking the reliability of the testing itself. He subpoenas all laboratory records, including calibration logs, quality control documentation, chain of custody records, analyst training records, and standard operating procedures. He reviews these documents line by line, identifying any deviations from proper protocols. He examines whether the laboratory maintained proper temperature controls for sample storage, whether preservatives were added in correct ratios, whether the blood was tested within appropriate time frames, and whether proper controls were run with each analytical batch.

Alan retains independent forensic toxicologists who can review the laboratory work and identify problems with the analysis. These experts can testify about factors that may have affected the accuracy of the results, including fermentation of the sample, contamination, improper testing methodology, or instrument malfunction. They can explain to the jury that a blood test result is only as reliable as the procedures followed in obtaining and analyzing the sample, and that any deviation from proper protocols renders the results scientifically unreliable.

Perhaps most importantly, Alan understands the concept of retrograde extrapolation and how blood alcohol levels change over time. The State must prove what your BAC was at the time of driving, not at the time blood was drawn, which may have been hours later. Alan can present expert testimony showing that your BAC at the time of the accident was actually below the legal limit, even if the test result hours later showed a higher level. This defense becomes particularly powerful when there is evidence that you consumed alcohol after the accident but before blood was drawn, or when the timing of your last drink means alcohol was still being absorbed into your system at the time of the accident.

Breaking the Chain of Causation

Even if the State can prove you were driving and you were impaired, they still must prove that your impairment caused the death. This causation element represents one of the most powerful areas for defense, and Alan's strategic use of accident reconstruction experts can mean the difference between a manslaughter conviction and an acquittal or reduction to a misdemeanor DUI.

Alan immediately retains the most qualified accident reconstruction experts available, not the ones who charge the lowest fees. These experts examine every aspect of the collision, including vehicle damage patterns, crush profiles, paint transfers, road surface evidence, sight distances, traffic control devices, and the final resting positions of the vehicles. They calculate speeds using scientific formulas based on vehicle dynamics and energy transfer. They create detailed diagrams and computer simulations that show exactly how the collision occurred.

The goal of this reconstruction is to demonstrate that factors other than your impairment caused the fatal accident. Perhaps the other driver ran a red light or stop sign, making the collision unavoidable regardless of your sobriety. Perhaps a mechanical failure like a brake defect or tire blowout caused you to lose control. Perhaps road design defects, inadequate signage, or poor lighting contributed to the accident in ways that would have affected any driver. Perhaps hazardous road conditions like oil, debris, or potholes played a causal role.

Alan presents this evidence through expert testimony that directly challenges the State's reconstruction. While the prosecution's experts work for law enforcement and may approach the case with predetermined conclusions, Alan's independent experts analyze the evidence objectively and are not afraid to reach conclusions that favor the defense. When these experts testify at trial, juries see highly credentialed professionals explaining in clear, understandable terms why the prosecution's theory of the accident is wrong and why other factors actually caused the collision.

This causation defense works even in cases where you admit to drinking before driving. Florida law does not make it a crime simply to drive after drinking and then be involved in a fatal accident. The State must prove that the impairment caused or contributed to the accident. If a sober driver in the same circumstances would have been involved in the same collision, then causation cannot be established, and you cannot be convicted of DUI manslaughter.

Strategic Negotiations Based on Case Weaknesses

While Alan prepares every case as though it will go to trial, he also understands that the best outcome for some clients may involve negotiated resolutions that avoid the risk of a mandatory four-year prison sentence or the potential for a fifteen or thirty-year sentence. However, prosecutors only offer favorable plea agreements when they recognize serious weaknesses in their case and understand they face a real risk of losing at trial.

Alan's comprehensive investigation and preparation of motions to suppress evidence, motions to dismiss charges, and retained expert witnesses demonstrates to prosecutors that their case has problems. When prosecutors know they may lose their blood evidence on a Fourth Amendment motion, when they know their accident reconstruction expert will face devastating cross-examination from a qualified defense expert, when they know their laboratory analyst will be challenged by someone who actually understands the science, they become much more willing to discuss resolutions that do not involve mandatory prison time.

Alan negotiates from a position of strength because he has done the work necessary to identify and exploit weaknesses in the State's case. He can point to specific legal issues that create reasonable doubt, specific scientific problems with the blood testing, specific causation issues raised by accident reconstruction, and specific constitutional violations that may result in suppression of critical evidence. Prosecutors understand that taking a weak case to trial carries risks for them as well, and Alan's reputation for thorough preparation and willingness to take cases to trial when necessary gives him credibility in these negotiations.

Understanding the Human Element

Beyond the science and the legal strategy, Alan understands what you are experiencing emotionally. You are facing the possibility of spending the next four to thirty years in prison. You are dealing with the knowledge that someone died in an accident you were involved in, and that reality haunts you regardless of the legal outcome. You may be experiencing trauma from the accident itself, anxiety about your future, and fear about what will happen to your family and career. You need an attorney who sees you as a human being, not just another case file.

Alan takes the time to understand your personal circumstances, your background, your family situation, and what is at stake for you beyond simply avoiding prison. He explains the process in terms you can understand, keeps you informed about developments in your case, and remains accessible when you have questions or concerns. He understands that the uncertainty of pending criminal charges affects every aspect of your life, and he works to resolve your case as quickly as possible while still providing the thorough defense you deserve.

When appropriate, Alan works with your family members to help them understand the legal process and what they can do to support you. He can connect you with resources for counseling, substance abuse treatment, or other services that may be helpful both for your well-being and for presenting mitigating factors to the court if your case proceeds to sentencing.

Experience Across Multiple Jurisdictions

Alan has handled DUI manslaughter cases in Broward County, Palm Beach County, Miami-Dade County, Hendry County, and Glades County. This experience across multiple jurisdictions gives him insight into how different prosecutors' offices approach these cases, which judges are receptive to particular legal arguments, and which courthouses have the most favorable or unfavorable procedures for defendants. He understands local customs and practices that can significantly impact the handling of your case.

This experience also means Alan has established relationships with the best expert witnesses in South Florida, knows which accident reconstruction firms produce the most credible and thorough analyses, and has worked with forensic toxicologists who can effectively communicate complex scientific concepts to juries. He does not need to spend time searching for qualified experts because he already knows who the best professionals are and has worked with them successfully in previous cases.

Why This Matters for Your Case

When you face DUI manslaughter charges, you need more than a general criminal defense attorney who handles a little bit of everything. You need someone who has invested the time and resources to develop deep expertise in the specific scientific and legal issues that determine the outcome of these cases. You need someone who will fight for you from day one, who will challenge the State's evidence using both legal arguments and scientific knowledge, and who will present a defense that creates reasonable doubt in the minds of jurors.

Alan S. Bernstein provides this level of representation. His specialized training, his aggressive investigation tactics, his scientific knowledge, his experience litigating Fourth Amendment issues, and his strategic use of expert witnesses combine to create a defense that gives you the best possible chance of avoiding a DUI manslaughter conviction. He has the knowledge, skills, and determination to challenge every aspect of the State's case and to fight for your freedom with everything he has.

The prosecution has unlimited resources, teams of investigators, and the full weight of law enforcement supporting their case against you. You need an attorney who can level the playing field, who has the expertise to challenge their scientific evidence, and who will not be intimidated by the severity of the charges. Alan S. Bernstein is that attorney.

TIME IS CRITICAL

If you are facing DUI manslaughter charges, every moment matters. You have only 10 days to request a formal review hearing to challenge the administrative suspension of your driver's license. Evidence at the accident scene changes or disappears. Witnesses' memories fade. Surveillance video gets deleted. Your defense attorney needs to begin working immediately to protect your rights and build your defense.

Do not wait. Do not give statements to law enforcement. Do not try to handle this alone. Contact Alan S. Bernstein P.A. immediately for a free, no-obligation consultation.

The state is building a case against you with unlimited resources. You need an experienced advocate who will fight for your rights, challenge the evidence, and pursue every available defense.

CONTACT INFORMATION

Alan S. Bernstein P.A.

Main Office: 2131 Hollywood Blvd, Suite 201 Hollywood, FL 33020

West Palm Beach Office: *By appointment only

Coral Springs Office: *By appointment only

Phone: 954-925-3111

After Hours/Weekends: 954-347-1000

Email: alanbernsteinlaw@gmail.com

Areas Served: Broward County, Palm Beach County, Miami-Dade County, Hendry County, Glades County

IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER

The information on this page is for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Every DUI manslaughter case is unique and depends on specific facts and circumstances. Only after consultation with an attorney and thorough review of your specific situation can proper legal advice be provided.

​

If you are under investigation for or have been charged with DUI manslaughter, contact Alan S. Bernstein P.A. immediately. Time is of the essence in preserving evidence and protecting your rights.

​

Last Updated: February 2026 Includes updates for Trenton's Law (HB 687) effective October 1, 2025