“Probable Cause for DUI Arrest,” in DUI Handbook § 4.6(c) (11 West’s Fla. Practice Series 2008-2009 ed.). For example, although an odor of alcohol is significant, it may not be dispositive. State v. Kliphouse, 771 So.2d 16, 23 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). Other factors “may include the defendant’s reckless or dangerous operation of a vehicle, slurred speech, lack of balance or dexterity, flushed face, bloodshot eyes, admissions, and poor performance on field sobriety exercises.” Id. (footnotes omitted); see also Ingram v. State, 928 So.2d 423 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006) (determining that law enforcement had probable cause to arrest defendant for DUI where defendant drove erratically, drove completely off the road, and had watery and bloodshot eyes and impeded speech); Whitley, 846 So.2d at 1166 (<HOLDING>); McNall v. Dep’t of Highway Safety & Motor
holding that although two officers detected a strong odor of alcohol coming from the defendants person that fact did not support an arrest for dui when there was no evidence presented whatsoever as to the defendants manner of driving that her speech was slurred her gait unsteady or her eyes red and glassy holding that there was probable cause to arrest defendant for dui where among other factors the officer observed defendant driving erratically and defendants eyes were glassy holding that there was insufficient probable cause for a dui arrest when inter alia although the defendants eyes were bloodshot and watery there was no evidence that her eyes were glassy or unfocused holding that there was sufficient probable cause for the defendants dui arrest when the evidence showed that the officer smelled the odor of alcohol on the defendants breath the defendants eyes were bloodshot and watery and his breath test was positive for alcohol holding that there was insufficient probable cause for a dui arrest when inter alia there was testimony that the defendants eyes were bloodshot and watery