Mr. Goldman’s client was facing his eighth DUII. Due to his client’s prior history of DUIIs, the best plea offer was to spend one full year in jail. Unfortunately, this was not the best of factual cases for defense. Mr. Goldman’s client was at least a 0.20 and the police had followed all the proper procedures. The one ray of hope (and not necessarily a bright ray of hope) was that the police had not seen Mr. Goldman’s client drive. The client had told the police he drove; but, they had not actually seen him driving. Accordingly, at trial Mr. Goldman focused on how his client could not be trusted to tell the truth! He was drunk, so his mental facilities were impaired – that was a reason the prosecution was prosecuting him after all. Additionally, Mr. Goldman proved that his client had told the police many different, and incompatible, stories about what had happened. Since, the prosecutor needed the jury to believe the one story Mr. Goldman’s client had given about being the driver and Mr. Goldman proved that his client couldn’t be trusted; the jury returned a Not Guilty decision after only twenty minutes of deliberation.