Case Results


Thomas C. Grajek View Profile

Thomas By Thomas C. Grajek

Below are recent jury trial results. No attorney wins all of their trials. Many of my trials are difficult cases many other lawyers would not try. Even though my client may have been found guilty, I will have learned a wealth of information to use at my next trial. It also provides incentive to work even harder so I do not lose the next case.

When researching attorneys to represent you, does the attorney list their jury trials? Are their jury trials recent or from 10 years ago when they were employed as a prosecutor? Are they honest enough to list their losses or just the victories?


My client was arrested by the Lake Hamilton Police Department.  After being pulled over, he performed the Field Sobriety Tests including the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN opr pen) test, the Walk and Turn, One Leg Stand, and Finger-to-Nose Tests.  It was my opinion that he passed these “tests” and did not show impairment.  My client refused the breath test because he did not feel he should have been arrested in the first place.  At trial, I brought in an expert on Field Sobriety Tests so that we could explain to the jury why the officer conducted and scored the exercises incorrectly.  The jury agreed and my client was found NOT GUILTY of DUI.

Polk County 2014-CT-002726-WH, Not Guilty Verdict March 10, 2015 – Judge Griffin


My client was arrested for DUI by the Lake Hamilton Police Dept. and given a breath test by the Polk County Sheriff’s Office.  Sgt. Nunemaker testified that my client was crossing over the traffic lines numerous times and tried to make a right hand turn where no road existed.  After submitting to the field sobriety exercises, my client was given a breath test and the results were 0.192 and 0.192, over twice the legal limit of 0.08 (almost 2½ times the legal limit).  By knowing the problems with the breath test machine (Intoxilyzer 8000), I was able to explain to the the jury the flaws and errors of the breath test machine.  I was able to explain to the jury why they should not believe the breath test results in this DUI case.  Also, by investigating the case and obtaining the video of the driving, I was able to prove to the jury that the driving pattern was quite different from what the police testified to on the stand.  The jury found my client NOT GUILTY!!!  If you have been arrested for DUI and took the breath test, retain a DUI lawyer that knows the problems with the Intoxilyzer breath test machine and knows how to try these types of criminal cases.

Polk County 2012-CT-011466-WH, Not Guilty Verdict December 10, 2013 – Judge Griffin


My client was arrested in the Polk County Sheriff prostitution sting and charged with solicitation for lewdness that mandates the $5,000.00 “civil penalty”.   I filed a motion to suppress arguing that the arrest was illegal and violated his constitutional rights.  A motion to suppress is a legal document requesting the court throw evidence out in a criminal case.  The court agreed and found there was no “probable cause” to arrest my client.  This suppressed or excluded from court my client’s identity and any his alleged statements to the police.  Because the court found no probable cause, the prosecutor will be unable to prove the case to the much higher standard beyond a reasonable doubt.

Polk County 2013-MM-004906-BA, Motion to Suppress Granted October 10, 2013 – Judge Fegers


It was a long trial week that resulted in a deadlocked jury 3 voting “Not Guilty” and 3 voting “Guilty.”  What does that mean?  After 3 days of trial, we will have to try the case again.  A jury verdict must be unanimous.  When jurors can not come to a unanimous verdict, the judge reads them a jury instruction called an “Allen charge” in the hopes that the jury can reach a verdict.  The jury informed us in a note that they were evenly split in the case.  This is the case I was trying to get every Polk County Sheriff DUI dismissed for destroying the booking video which included the Drug Influence Evaluation conducted at the jail.  My client was accused of driving under the influence of a controlled substance.  The breath test was a 0.000 and the urine test came back indicating the presence of controlled substances, but I was able to get the prosecutor’s expert to admit there is no proof the substance had any affect on my client’s “normal faculties.”  This means that we will have to re-try the case in the future…stay tuned.

Polk County DUI 2011-CT-000916-BA, Jury deadlocked August 28, 2013 – Judge Fegers


Why should you retain a criminal defense attorney that files motions and tries cases?  This case is a prime example of what an aggressive defense attorney can do for you.  My client was charged with DUI after allegedly striking another car in a parking lot.  My client would lose his job if he was convicted of a DUI and needed a DUI lawyer that would fight for him.  By filing a Motion to Suppress in his case, I was able to educate the prosecutor about the problems with the case because the Lakeland Police officer did not do a  proper job of investigating the DUI, conducting the Field Sobriety Exercises, and collecting evidence in the case.  By doing the motion work and knowing the law as it applied to DUI’s, I was able to get his charges reduced and save his job.  When you are talking to an attorney you are thinking about retaining for your criminal case, always ask that attorney how many cases they have tried, how often they file motions, when was the last time the attorney did so, and the results.  Many attorneys do not put in the time and effort to defend you properly in court.  If you are looking for someone to fight for you, ask these questions.

Lakeland PD DUI 2012-CT-011100-LD, DUI reduced August 26, 2013 – Judge Abdoney


My client was accused of Making Harassing Phone Calls.  These cases often arise in domestic situations or after two people break-up.  Many times, the person receiving the calls will sign a “waiver of Prosecution.”  This criminal charge can be difficult for the prosecutor to prove in court.  I set my client’s case for trial and the charges were dropped at the trial date.

Criminal case dismissed August 21, 2013 – Judge Williams


This was my first DUI case to be heard under the new Formal Review rules.  My client and I discussed his options regarding whether to have a Formal review hearing to attack the suspension or waive the hearing in order to get him an immediate hardship license with no hard suspension to his driving privileges.  I always prefer to have the Formal Review hearing if possible.  I explained the reasons for this to my client who agreed.  This was the correct decision as I won the Formal Review hearing and the license suspension was invalidated.

DHSMV suspension invalidated August 12, 2013


My client was arrested for DUI with a 0.145 and 0.135 breath test results.  After filing numerous motions and having an evidentiary hearing to attack the DUI case and get evidence excluded, the prosecutor agreed to reduce the charge to Reckless Driving with Alcohol as a Factor.  In addition, my client was able to get a withhold of adjudication so he would not receive points on his license and not be convicted of this crime.  That makes this case eligible for sealing the arrest/criminal record.

Polk County DUI 2013-CT-000148-BA, DUI reduced August 15, 2013 – Judge Williams


After the Motion to Suppress was granted by the trial court, all evidence against my client was thrown out in his DUI case.  The prosecutor could not go forward and was forced to drop the DUI charge.  If you are looking to retain an attorney for your criminal case, ask that lawyer when they last filed and argued a Motion to Suppress.  Many attorneys do not know the law necessary to file a motion to suppress or dismiss, do not want to do the work or put in the time it takes to file and argue a motion to suppress, or are afraid to stand up and fight for you in court.  Would you rather have your case dismissed or go through an unnecessary jury trial where you could end up in jail?

Polk County DUI 2012-CT-009953-LD, Case Dismissed July 30, 2013 – Judge Abdoney – Lakeland Division


My client was arrested for DUI by Officer Edds of the Lakeland Police Department.  This officer was involved in my DUI trial regarding the procedure LPD officers use when completing DUI reports.  My trial was featured in the Ledger’s and News Channel 8’s investigation into LPD (link is below).  Sgt. Lloyd was also received a “no confidence” letter from the prosecutor.  Because of the issues I found in these Lakeland DUI cases, all of the cases where the driver was arrested by Ofc. Edds and Sgt. Lloyd are potentially being dropped by the prosecutor because of my work.  I also won my client’s Formal Review hearing so there was no license suspension and no indication on his license that he was arrested for DUI.

Lakeland DUI case 2013-CT-009984-LD – DUI DISMISSED July 19, 2013


What do Superman, X-ray vision, and spaghetti have to do with a not guilty verdict in a DUI trial?  A good criminal defense attorney must know how to educate and entertain a jury.  If a defense lawyer can not capture a jury’s attention and get them to listen to your defense, you will not win your trial.  I can never stress this enough, you need a local attorney defending your DUI!  In this case I filed various motions that took hours to argue.  Will an out-of-county attorney put that amount of time into your case?  Most of the motions were denied and the prosecutor refused to reduce the DUI charge.  So, my client had no choice to go to trial.  I have been at jury trials three (3) weeks in a row now and none of these attorneys from outside Polk County have been there once!  Are they afraid to try DUI cases? Are they unwilling to drive to Polk and try a case? Are they afraid of a Polk county jury?  I’m not. I fight for my clients!  By visiting the scene of the arrest on multiple occasions and weaving Superman, X-ray vision, and spaghetti into my theory of defense, I was able to get a 30 minute NOT GUILTY jury verdict.  This was a Polk County Sheriff DUI arrest with no video where the deputy testified my client did very poorly on all field sobriety exercises and admitted to drinking 6 draft beers in an hour.  My knowledge of PCSO policies and this deputy’s training helped me win this case.

Polk County DUI case CT-12-012547-BA, NOT GUILTY July 2, 2013 – Judge Flood


My client was placed on probation for felon in possession of a firearm.  After completing half his probation, all special conditions of his probation, and paying all the fines, I filed a motion to terminate his probation early.  The court granted the motion and my client is no longer on felony probation.  This is important because he no longer runs the risk of violating his probation and ending up in prison.

Polk County case CF-12-003455 – Probation terminated July 1, 2013


My client was arrested by a Florida Highway Patrol Trooper.  I was able to obtain the video of the DUI arrest including my client’s driving pattern and the trooper’s DUI investigation.  I was able to determine that the trooper did not perform the DUI investigation correctly and according to the law.  I filed a motion to suppress to the Field Sobriety Exercises (Tests is what law enforcement likes to call them) asking the court to exclude any evidence that field sobriety exercises were performed and any evidence obtained after the FSE’s.  The court granted my motion and threw out all the DUI evidence in the case.  The prosecutor had no choice, but to drop the DUI charge.  I also won the driver’s Formal Review hearing so there are no indications on his license that he was ever arrested for this DUI.

Polk County case CT-12-010919-BA, DUI dropped June 27, 2013 – Judge Fegers

Refusal to Submit to Breath Testing – DISMISSED

Refusal to submit to breath testing is a criminal offense in a 2nd DUI charge.  If you refuse the breath test during your 1st DUI arrest, it becomes a crime to refuse the breath test the next time you are arrested for DUI.  This crime is punishable by up to a year in jail.  This charge will almost always be tried separately from the DUI.  That is because in a DUI, the jury can not be told of the accused’s prior DUI arrests.  The prosecutor will always try the Refusal case before the DUI because the jury will know about the prior DUI and the Refusal to submit to breath testing is easier to prove.  The prosecutor only has to prove there was probable cause to arrest for a DUI, instead of beyond a reasonable doubt as in a DUI case.  This refusal case was a companion case to the DUI above and the prosecutor was forced to dismiss the case after I successfully got the evidence excluded when I won the Motion to Suppress Evidence.

Polk County case CT-12-010920-BA, Refusal to submit to breath testing dropped June 27, 2013 – Judge Fegers

DUI – NOT GUILTY JURY TRIAL VERDICT – Trial featured on News Channel 8

Monday, June 10, 2013, I selected a jury for my client charged with DUI.  In Polk County criminal cases, you select a jury on Monday and the actual trial is on a different day later in the week.  It took over 4 hours to select the jury.  Jury selection or “Voir Dire” is often called the most critical part of a trial.  If a jury is not open to your arguments and defense, you will not win your trial.  The trial was on Tuesday and lasted until 10:30 p.m.  During this trial, due to my thorough investigation of this DUI case and my knowledge about Lakeland Police Department procedures in DUI investigations, I was able to uncover newsworthy evidence that aided in the defense to this DUI arrest.  This evidence and my cross-examination was featured on News Channel 8 which has been doing an extremely thorough and in-depth investigation into LPD.  You can view the video here:

The evidence I discovered is just one of many reasons why you need a criminal defense attorney actually located in Polk County to defend you in court.  Many attorneys advertising on the internet are not located in Polk County.  You also need an attorney with the experience and fighting spirit that will stand up for you in court!

Lakeland DUI case 2012-TT-009984-LD NOT GUILTY verdict June 18, 2013 – Judge Abdoney

Improper Exhibition of a Firearm – CHARGES DISMISSED AT JURY TRIAL

My client was charged with waving a firearm at an elderly lady while driving down the road.  My client DENIED this ever occurred and the eyewitnesses, who were off-duty Polk County Sheriff deputies, made a mistake when they accused him of threatening this unknown woman with a firearm.  We took this case to jury trial.  After the prosecutor presented their side of the case, Judge Fegers granted my motion for a Judgment of Acquittal resulting in the charge being dismissed and my client going home a free and innocent man.  A “Judgment of Acquittal” is a motion made by a criminal defense attorney at the end of the prosecutor’s case that argues the prosecutor did not prove all the elements necessary to send the case to the jury for a verdict.  That means a jury does not even decide whether an accused person is guilty or not because the case is dismissed before you even get to that point.  It is very rare to have a “Judgment of Acquittal” granted, but it is the best outcome because there is no risk of a guilty verdict.

Polk County criminal case 2012-MM-014408-BA tried and dismissed May 14, 2013 – Judge Fegers

Refusal to Submit to breath, urine, or blood testing after a DUI arrest – NOT GUILTY JURY VERDICT

My client was accused of refusing to submit to testing in violation of Florida Statute 316.1932.  This charge arises when a driver is arrested for DUI a second time.  Refusing to submit to breath, urine, or a blood test after being arrested for DUI the first time is not a crime.  However, if you are arrested a second time for DUI, and your license was suspended for refusing to take the breath test on your 1st DUI, the refusal becomes a crime.  That means the driver gets charged with 2 crimes – DUI and Refusal to submit to testing.  These cases are extremely difficult to win at trial because the burden of proof for a conviction is so low.  The prosecutor only has to prove “probable cause” to arrest the driver for DUI and that the person refused breath testing or to provide a urine sample.  The prosecutor does not have to prove the driver was impaired beyond a reasonable doubt.  In addition, the jury knows the person has a previous DUI conviction!  I was able to prove my client should not have been arrested for DUI that night even though she was driving the wrong way on a divided highway at 60 mph right into the path of an oncoming Polk County Sheriff’s patrol car.  The jury agreed that it was a simple mistake of texting on a dark road and that my client showed no signs of impairment.  The jury found my client NOT GUILTY!

Polk County criminal case 2012-CT-005698-BA tried and dismissed March 4, 2013 – Judge Flood

Driving Under the Influence – Formal Review win! Six (6) month driver’s license suspension set aside.

My client was arrested for DUI by a Lakeland DUI squad officer.  The DHSMV suspended his license for having an breath test result over the 0.08 legal limit.  I cross-examined the arresting officer and breath test operator and was able to get the 6 month license suspension invalidated.

Polk County DUI DUI citation 4862-XEG, unlawful breath alcohol level suspension set aside June 10, 2013

Driving Under the Influence – Field Sobriety Exercises Suppressed, Identity Suppressed, and Refusal to take the Breath Test Suppressed

My client was pulled over for speeding on S. Florida Ave. in Lakeland, FL.  After being pulled over, a DUI investigation was begun by a member of Lakeland P.D.’s DUI squad.  Even though my client showed no signs of impairment on the DUI video, the DUI officer ordered him to perform field sobriety tests.  The driver passed them, but not in the officer’s opinion, so he was arrested and transported to LPD for breath testing.  Because he did not feel he should have been arrested and already proved that, he refused to submit to breath testing.  The court granted my “motion to suppress” the field sobriety exercises, refusal to take the breath test, and my client’s identity.  A “Motion to Suppress” is a document criminal defense attorneys file asking the court to exclude or throw out evidence because the police violated a person’s constitutional rights for an unlawful search or seizure.  The court agreed with me and now the prosecutor can not use the field sobriety exercises, breath test refusal, or identity of my client in court to prove my client was guilty of DUI.  Without this evidence, there is no way to prove the charge of DUI.

Polk County criminal case 2012-CT-009953-LD Motion granted May 30, 2013 – Judge Abdoney – Lakeland Division

Lakeland DUI charge DISMISSED

My client was arrested by Officer Cortes of the Lakeland Police Department’s DUI squad.  After reviewing the video, I filed motions regarding the field sobriety exercises, stop of the driver’s truck, and whether a DUI investigation should have been conducted by the officer.  The court granted my motion to suppress the field sobriety exercises (FSE’s).  This meant the prosecutor could no longer use my client’s performance on the FSE’s to prove the DUI charge.  Without this evvidence, there was no evidence to prove the charge of driving under the influence and the prosecutor dismissed the DUI charge.

Lakeland DUI case TT-11-000539-LD dismissed April, 2103

DUI reduced to Reckless Driving

My client was arrested for DUI with a breath test result over 0.08.  Because my client retained me the day after his arrest, I was able to get the booking video of him at the Polk County Jail.  The video showed that he was not impaired.  I used this to convince the prosecutor to reduce his charge to Reckless Driving to keep the DUI off his record.  Do not let other DUI lawyers fool you.  Many will post results saying “DUI dismissed”, when in fact the charge was reduced like this case.  Retain an attorney that will be honest with you and does not overstate his results.

Polk County DUI case 12-CT-008480-BA reduced to Reckless June 10, 2013

DUI reduced to Reckless Driving

My client was arrested for DUI with a breath test result over 0.08.  After filing motions to suppress, which were denied, I set the DUI for jury trial.  I had the transcript of the Formal Review and video of the scene to show the prosecutor while the criminal charge should be reduced.  The deputy’s testimony at the Formal Review was different than the Motion to Suppress.  That is why you need a DUI attorney that will subpoena officers to a Formal Review hearing to try and find discrepancies in an officer’s testimony.  Why should there be more than one version of what happened?  The testimony in this case also differed from the DUI report.  By doing the legal work that needs to be done on these cases, I was able to keep a DUI off my client’s record and avoid a 6 month driver’s license suspension.

Polk County DUI case 12-CT-007448-BA reduced to Reckless June 10, 2013

Careless Driving – Citation DISMISSED

My client was given a citation for Careless Driving.  I strategically set the case for Arraignment. At that court date, I filed a motion to dismiss which was granted by the court.  This keeps my client’s driving record clean and avoid increase in their car insurance rates

Polk County citation CI-13-011036-XX dismissed May 7, 2013.

Aggravated Assault (Deadly Weapon) and Domestic Battery – CHARGES DROPPED

My client was arrested for Aggravated Assault, a 3rd degree felony, and Domestic Violence a misdemeanor for allegedly throwing a bottle at the alleged victim and threatening the alleged victim with a knife.  After someone is arrested, an aggressive criminal defense attorney will call the prosecutor and attempt to get the prosecutor to drop the charge.  Many Polk criminal lawyers do not do this because they do not know this is possible or are lazy.  Even though you are arrested, that does not necessarily mean that you are formally charged.  By explaining to the prosecutor these acts did not happen and my clients version of what occurred, I was successful in getting the crime of violence charges dropped. My client never had to go to court for these crimes.

Polk County criminal case 2013-CF-001940, charges dropped March 25, 2013.

Injunction for Protection Against Domestic Violence – INJUNCTION DISMISSED

If you have an injunction against you, it can subject to arrest for violating the injunction.  You also may not possess a firearm.

Polk County Petition for Injunction 53-2013DR-001878 dismissed March 2013.

Possession of CannabisCHARGES DISMISSED

My client was charged with Possession of Marijuana after he was pulled over for a traffic infraction. The police requested consent to search, but my client exercised his rights and refused to allow law enforcement to search the vehicle. The deputy then called for a canine (K-9) unit to come to the scene an conduct a dog sniff of the vehicle. There were two (2) people in the car and the marijuana was not on my client, so it was a constructive possession case. I filed a motion to suppress challenging the search by the canine unit and the charges were dropped at the hearing.

Polk County case MM-11-006992-BA, criminal charges dismissed January 2012.

Possession of Cannabis – CHARGES DISMISSED

My client was charged with Possession of Marijuana after she was a passenger in a car pulled over for a traffic infraction. The police received consent to search from the driver. There were more than one person in the car and the marijuana was not on my client, so it was a constructive possession case. I filed a motion to suppress challenging the search and the charges were dropped at the hearing.

Polk County case MM-11-007191-BA, criminal charges dismissed January 2012.

Petit Theft – Charges Dropped – Polk County Case, MM-11-001872-LD, January 2012

Domestic Violence – Charges Dropped – Polk County Case,MM-11-009697-BA, January 2012

JURY TRIAL – NOT GUILTY – Possession of Child Pornography (100 counts)

My client was charged with 100 counts of Possession of Child Pornography. I filed a Motion to Suppress arguing that the search and seizure of the alleged child pornography was illegal. I argued that there was no search warrant and the informant’s hearsay statements to the police were unreliable and did not give police probable cause to search for evidence. The court denied the motion. Therefore, we went to trial and the jury found my client NOT GUILTY! on all counts. Please understand, I am not defending the crime of Child Pornography, but the citizen accused of the crime. How terrible would it be if an innocent person was wrongly accused and convicted of such a heinous crime?

Bartow, Polk County, Florida Criminal CF-07-003861-XX case tried October 2008

JURY TRIAL – NOT GUILTY – Driving Under the Influence (DUI) – 3rd DUI within 10 years

My client was charged with Driving Under the Influence. My client was charged with his 3rd DUI in 10 years which carries a 10 year driver’s license suspension. My client was pulled over for allegedly failing to maintain a single lane, weaving, driving over a curb, and driving in the wrong lane of travel. The Motion to Suppress the stop of the vehicle was denied by the criminal court. The driver refused to perform field sobriety exercises, which is a right under the law. The alleged drunk driver also refused to submit to a breath test to determine the breath alcohol level. Therefore, we went to trial and the jury found my client NOT GUILTY!

Lakeland, Polk County, Florida Criminal CF-10-000699-XX case tried February 2011


Tried week of March 1, 2010

Count 1 – Sexual Battery on Person less than 12 Years of Age (Capital Sexual Battery) GUILTY

Count 2 – Sexual Battery on Person less than 12 Years of Age (Capital Sexual Battery)


Count 3 – Sexual Battery on Person less than 12 Years of Age (Capital Sexual Battery)


Count 4 – Lewd Molestation – GUILTY

Count 5 – Lewd Molestation –


Count 6 – Lewd or Lascivious Exhibition –


My Client was charged with various sex crimes including 3 counts of Capital Sexual Battery. My client allegedly confessed during a controlled phone call tape recorded by the police. My client also allegedly confessed during his interrogation by the police which was captured on videotape. Both of these pieces of evidence were played for the jury during the trial. Even though the jury heard both of these alleged confessions, the jury still found my client Not Guilty of 4 of the counts. I argued that the statement to the police was a False Confession and should be disregarded by the jury.

Bartow, Polk County, Florida Criminal Case CF-09-001818-XX

Driving Under the Influence (DUI) – NOT GUILTY

Tried week of February 1, 2010


My client was charged with Driving Under the Influence. The deputy alleged that my client almost ran him over when the deputy flagged him down at the scene of an accident. The deputy chased him down, had him provide field sobriety exercises, and then arrested him for DUI. My client refused the breath test. There was no video evidence in the case. My client was found NOT GUILTY after the jury deliberated less than 5 minutes.

Polk County Case TT-09-004228-BA

Driving Under the Influence (DUI) – NOT GUILTY

Tried week of November 30, 2009


My client was charged with Driving Under the Influence after rear-ending a police car at a stop light. My client made numerous statements after the accident that “You’re going to arrest me for DUI because I have been drinking.” The officer alleged that my client did poorly on the field sobriety exercises, and then arrested her for DUI. My client refused the breath test. There was video evidence in the case. My client was found NOT GUILTY of the DUI after the jury deliberated less than 20 minutes. The court then dismissed the civil infraction for rear-ending the police car.

Polk County Case TT-09-001650-LD and CI-09-012431-LD

The above is just a sample of the many criminal cases I have handled for my clients. These results are not necessarily representative of results obtained in all cases. I can not guarantee or promise any specific result. The facts and circumstances of your case may differ from the facts and circumstances described in the above representative cases.


Lakeland, FL (863) 838-5549
Tampa, FL (813) 789-6404