IN THE COUNTY COURT OF THE

SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN

AND FOR LEON COUNTY, FLORIDA.
CASE NO.
SPN

15CT00762
240095

STATE OF FLORIDA
vs.
Kenneth L. Williams,
Defendant(s).
________________________________/

NO INFORMATION

COMES NOW the State of Florida, by and through the undersigned Assistant State Attorney, and
enters this NO INFORMATION in the above-styled cause for the following reasons:
1.

On April 3, 2015, Kenneth Williams, was arrested for Driving While Under The Influence, a

second degree misdemeanor.

2.

To prove the crime of DUI the State has the burden of proving two elements beyond a

reasonable doubt to a jury. The State must prove that the defendant was driving and that the defendants
faculties were impaired by alcohol. Upon review of the video evidence from the law enforcement officers
patrol vehicle, as well as the video evidence obtained from the Leon County Jail, the State is unable to meet
this burden.
3.

Significant portions of the DUI investigation were not captured on video due to the positioning

of the officers patrol vehicle. Jurors give the greatest weight to video evidence (when it is available) and,
based on the camera placement during the officers initial encounter with the defendant, as well as the location
of the surveillance cameras at the jail, key observations of impairment made by the officer were not recorded
and, therefore, are not available for a jury to consider. For example, the officer noted indicators of impairment
as Williams stepped out of his car; however, these signs of impairment were not captured on the video.
Furthermore, the brief period of time where Mr. Williams is on camera does not provide the jury with visible or

audible evidence that would prove this defendant was impaired beyond a reasonable doubt. Juries want to see
the evidence, not just hear about it from the witnesses; jurors would evaluate this case based on what they see
and hear with their own eyes and ears, specifically, the video evidence.
4.

The officers dashboard camera recorded the defendants driving pattern before the stop.

Although the officer made observations about the defendants driving that could be attributed to impairment,
on video the indicators are subtle and, therefore, would not be very persuasive with a jury. The defendant
weaved within his lane, and his tires touched the lane markers, however, they did so only four times and the
defendant did not affect any other traffic. The lanes are narrow on this section of Tennessee Street and the
defendant was driving a large vehicle. There were no other cars on the road near the defendant. The defendant
only traveled a short distance before being stopped by law enforcement; thus, the jury would not be able to
evaluate his driving pattern over a distance. The video does not show that the defendants driving was
dangerous or affected other drivers.
5.

Therefore, although the officer had probable cause for the defendants arrest, the evidence

before the State is not sufficient to sustain a conviction at trial. For the reasons stated herein, the State of
Florida will not move forward on these charges and files this written No Information.

Dated on April 27, 2015.

WILLIAM N. MEGGS
STATE ATTORNEY
/s/Jeremy Mutz
Jeremy Mutz
Assistant State Attorney

cc:

Officer Cutcliffe, Florida State University PD #15-23

Jonathan Simon and Robert Evans, Counsel for the Defense
Chief David Perry, Florida State Police Department

3715T04647