State v. D.G.: Client was stopped after a Snohomish County Sheriff's Office (SCSO) deputy allegedly observed client's vehicle traveling outside of its designated lane of travel on the freeway. After advising the law enforcement officer that no alcohol had been consumed, a Washington State Patrol (WSP) trooper responded to the scene and asked our client to perform voluntary Field Sobriety Tests. After such were performed, our client opted to not provide a voluntary Preliminary Breath Test sample (next to client's vehicle). Our client was eventually arrested and transported to the Snohomish County Jail, where they refused to provide an evidentiary breath alcohol test. Rather than contact a judge to sign a warrant to draw client's blood (which may have been done despite client's lack of consent), the trooper concluded that our client had "refused" to provide a breath sample and merely booked them into custody. Unfortunately, our client had previous DUI arrests for (from long ago). Thus, the prosecutor's office was unwilling to negotiate the case. After several months of litigation, the matter proceeded to Jury Trial, where a Mistrial was declared pursuant to the prosecuting attorney eliciting testimony from the SCSO deputy in violation of the court's previous rulings. The violation was quickly noticed by defense counsel; brought to the court's attention; and after a few minutes of research in chambers, the court declared a mistrial and dismissed the case without prejudice. The prosecutor subsequently re-filed the matter (lawfully). However, the judge found that the State's mismanagement of the case led to a violation of our client's right to a speedy trial. Thus, the case was finally dismissed with prejudice.