'They Have No Case': Why an Expert Says Tiger Woods' Crash DUI Charge Likely Won't Stick

"They have no case, no DUI case. Period, full stop," says longtime South Florida defense attorney Robert Reiff about the charge stemming from Tiger Woods' recent crash.

On March 27, 2026, Tiger Woods was arrested and charged with DUI after his rollover car crash in Jupiter Island, Florida. A local DUI defense lawyer has now explained why he believes that charge won't hold up.

The Evidentiary Gap: No Alcohol, No Urine Test, No Clear Proof

After the crash and arrest, the Martin County Sheriff’s Office provided the public with the following key details. Tiger Woods failed several field sobriety tests, his breathalyzer results registered at 0.00%, and he refused a urine test at the station. Based on those facts, Florida defense attorney Robert Reiff told Yahoo! Sports that he believes the DUI charge likely won't stick.

“Seems like they have no case, no DUI case. Period, full stop.”

Reiff explained that under Florida law, a drug-related DUI conviction requires prosecutors to prove that the driver was under the influence of a controlled substance. With alcohol ruled out by the breathalyzer test and no chemical evidence because Woods declined the chemical urinalysis test, he doesn't see enough evidence to prove the charge. He also stated that officers assuming that Woods had taken a controlled substance wasn't good enough on its own.

“Sometimes [officers] go to the default position, 'We think you’re impaired. Take a breath test, pass it. Oh well, then it must be drugs.' Sorry, it doesn’t work that way.”

The lawyer went on to address why he believes the field sobriety tests Woods failed won't be sufficient to back up the DUI charge. Reiff pointed to the seven back surgeries the pro golfer has undergone and the leg injuries he has suffered as possible explanations for his poor balance and coordination. He then touched on how Woods' defense team could potentially challenge the results.

“I wouldn’t be shocked at all if Tiger Woods and his team have had him try to [lift his leg six inches] as part of neurological testing and he couldn’t, especially with one leg shorter than the other and all those back issues."

Ultimately, Reiff noted that more details surfacing could change the likely outcome of the DUI case Woods is facing. Still, based on what has been revealed so far, he doesn't think prosecutors will be able to prove that charge.

“There’s certainly more to this story, and we need to find out [more]. But I’ll certainly tell you from what I’ve been hearing … it sure doesn’t seem like they have proof — at least not of the DUI.”

Woods was also charged with refusal to submit to a lawful test for declining to take the chemical urinalysis. Reiff did not question the state's ability to make that separate charge stick.

Observers have drawn parallels between Woods' current legal issues and what he faced following his 2017 crash, including the lawyer Richard Wagner, who wrote: "This incident closely mirrors Woods’ prior DUI-related case in 2017, which also involved impairment without alcohol." In 2017, Woods agreed to plead guilty to reckless driving and enter a diversion program after the original DUI charge was reduced.