New Jersey DWI/DUI Lawyer: What Happens If I Am Convicted of Drunk Driving in Another State?

March 8, 2016 by EMJanzekovich

Getting arrested and facing charges for drunk driving can be a very frightening and intimidating experience. You do not know what to expect. These feelings of anxiety may increase if you are arrested out-of-state and far from your home and family. If you are a New Jersey resident, in addition to having to deal with the charges in the state where you were convicted you will also face serious consequences in New Jersey.

Once your out-of-state DUI has been reported, you will probably have your license suspended in New Jersey and face expensive surcharges from the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission (MVC). In addition, if you are convicted of drunk driving in New Jersey any time during the ten years following your out-of-state conviction, you will face enhanced penalties in New Jersey as a repeat offender.

Suspension of Your Drivers License

Once you are convicted of DUI out-of-state, the record of your conviction will be reported to the Chief Administrator of the MVC through the Interstate Drivers License Compact (the Compact). The Compact is an interstate agreement between 45 states to exchange information about license suspensions and traffic violations, including DUI offenses. The Compact’s motto is “One Driver, One License, One Record.” The only five states that do not participate in the Compact are Massachusetts, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia and Tennessee; all other states, including the District of Columbia, participate.

When you are convicted in a state that participates in the Compact, your driving record will be affected just as if you had committed the offense in New Jersey. Out-of-state non-moving violations like parking tickets, tinted windows or a loud exhaust pipe will not be reported to the New Jersey MVC. But serious charges like a DWI/DUI will be reported.

For example, if you are convicted of a DWI/DUI in New York or Pennsylvania, your license will be suspended in New Jersey for:

180 days if it is your first DWI/DUI offense
2 years if it is your second DWI/DUI offense
10 years if it is your third (or greater) DWI/DUI offense

All prior convictions (whether out-of-state or in New Jersey) count as prior offenses for determining how long your license will be administratively suspended.

Motor Vehicle Surcharges

Surcharges are fines assessed by the New Jersey Surcharge Violation System. If you have too many points on your license for moving violations, or if you are convicted of a DWI, you are liable for a surcharge in addition to any court fines and penalties you have to pay in the state where you were convicted. Once your out-of-state conviction is reported to the MVC, you will have to pay $1000 per year for the next three years. If the conviction is your second within three years, or your third offense, you will have to pay $1500 per year for the next three years.

Sentencing Enhancements

Violation of any law that is “substantially similar” to New Jersey’s own DWI statute will constitute a prior conviction if you are later convicted of a DWI in New Jersey. This is true even if the state where you were convicted is not a signatory to the Compact.

New Jersey DWI – DUI Lawyer Edward M. Janzekovich Represents People With Prior Drunk Driving Convictions

If you have been convicted of drunk driving in another state, and are facing new charges in New Jersey, trusted DWI lawyer Edward M. Janzekovich is prepared to defend you. We have a successful track record of defending clients in Ocean County, Monmouth County, Mercer County, Middlesex County, Union County and Somerset County, including Union, Dover, Brick, Jackson, Wall, Woodbridge, East Brunswick, Evesham, Howell, Robbinsville, Bound Brook, Neptune, Hamilton, Linden City, Bridgewater and Tinton Falls. To take charge of your situation, call us at 732-257-1137 or contact us online today.

Filed Under: Criminal Law, Drunk Driving, DWI - DUI Tagged With: busted dwi in another state, criminal attorney new jersey, drunk driving, drunk driving in another state, dui, dui attorney, dui in another state, dwi, dwi attorney, new jersey drunk driving attorney, new jersey dui lawyer, nj dwi attorney, out of home state dui, out of home state dwi

New Jersey DWI – DUI Lawyer Edward Janzekovich – DUI – DWI Checkpoints

February 23, 2016 by EMJanzekovich

In general, police officers in New Jersey can only stop a vehicle if they have a reasonable suspicion that an offense has been committed. They must also be able to specifically describe the grounds for their suspicion. Despite this constitutional protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, police may randomly stop drivers at sobriety checkpoints (also called roadblocks) even if they have no reason to believe that anyone in the vehicle committed an offense. Because random checkpoint stops are such an intrusive law enforcement technique, the police must be able to show a rational basis for establishing the roadblock. There are strict requirements for both setting up and executing roadblocks.

What To Expect At A Sobriety Checkpoint

As you approach a road block, you should see signs and lighting designating the checkpoint area. You will be required to slow down and wait for your turn to be processed through the checkpoint. Police officers will detain drivers in a pre-selected pattern (for example, every driver or every fifth driver). Drivers cannot be stopped on their appearance alone.

If you are stopped, you will be detained for a brief period of time. Police may ask basic questions, request documentation and look for signs that you are under the influence of drugs or alcohol. If you exhibit these signs, you will be asked to move your car to a separate area where you will be asked to undergo a field sobriety test.

Roadblock Requirements

The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures. This means that if police do not follow the proper procedures for setting up and executing a roadblock, any evidence obtained may be inadmissible in court—including breathalyzer or blood test results. Courts will consider various factors in determining whether a roadblock was proper, including:

Whether notice of the time, date and location of the roadblock was published in advance
Whether advance warning was given to individual approaching motorists (use of lights, signs, etc.)
Whether statistical data demonstrates that the roadblock was set up in a particularly problematic location for drinking and driving
Whether public safety and awareness are fostered by the checkpoint
The time of day when the roadblock is conducted
Average length each motorist is detained
Whether less intrusive measures could have been used to combat drunk driving in the area

Police officers and state troopers do not have the authority to select a DUI checkpoint location or time. They must first receive a directive from their commanding officer.

What Happens if I Attempt to Evade a Roadblock?

If you are intoxicated and attempt to evade a properly established road block, this may give police sufficient reasonable suspicion to stop your vehicle.

New Jersey DUI Lawyer Edward M. Janzekovich Represents Drivers Who Have Been Charged With DWI at Police Roadblocks

State and federal laws carefully protect the rights of citizens to be free from unlawful searches and seizures. If you were stopped at a sobriety checkpoint and arrested for driving under the influence, New Jersey DWI lawyer Edward M. Janzekovich will obtain all documents relating to the establishment of the road block, and analyze it to determine whether it was legal. I will also look at the circumstances surrounding your stop to determine whether police followed proper procedures and detained you for a reasonable amount of time. Unreasonable detentions raise different constitutional issues and may provide you with additional defenses.

We proudly serve clients in Ocean County, Monmouth County, Mercer County, Middlesex County, Union County and Somerset County. To discuss your case, call us at 732-257-1137 or contact us online today.

Filed Under: Drunk Driving, DWI - DUI, DWI & DUI Checkpoints, Field Sobriety Tests, Illegal Searches and Seizures, New Jersey Attorney, New Jersey Search Without Warrant Tagged With: blood alcohol test new jersey, checkpoints new jersey, DUI – DWI Defense Attorney, dui attorney, dui checkpoints new jersey, dwi attorney, dwi checkpoints new jersey, East Brunswick DWI Attorney, new jersey blood alcohol testing, new jersey dui attorney, new jersey dui refusal, new jersey dui roadblock, new jersey dwi checkpoint, new jersey roadblock sobriety checkpoints, nj roadblock dwi checkpoints, Union Township DUI DWI, Union Township NJ DWI Attorney, unreasonable searches and seizures, unreasonable searches and seizures dui, unreasonable searches and seizures dwi, unreasonable searches and seizures new jersey

Field Sobriety Tests in New Jersey

February 16, 2016 by EMJanzekovich

New Jersey DWI – DUI Lawyer Edward M. Janzekovich

Field Sobriety Test Attorney in New Jersey

When you think of getting pulled over for suspected drunk driving, you might think of police administering a breathalyzer test to determine whether you are intoxicated. Or you might think of the more “old school” field sobriety tests depicted in so many movies, where police ask a driver to walk in a straight line, follow a flashlight with their eyes, or count while standing on one foot.

In New Jersey, law enforcement officers are supposed to conduct both types of testing. A field sobriety test is often given first at the side of the road, so police can build probable cause to conduct a breathalyzer test later at the police station or take you to the hospital for a blood test. Another reason police have you perform field sobriety tests is because it is used to serve as “backup” evidence in case the breathalyzer results are later found to be inadmissible. However, the results of field sobriety tests are also often inadmissible, because so many factors can invalidate results.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has developed three specific tests that, if performed properly, are considered reliable evidence of intoxication, but only two of them can be admitted as proof of intoxication in New Jersey:

The Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN) Test

In performing this test, officers will ask the driver to follow a small object, usually a flashlight or pen, with their eyes. In order for results to be accurate, the object must be held 12-15 inches away from the face and just above the eyes. Not all individuals are appropriate candidates for this test. An officer should check for equal pupil size and other indications that the driver may have a medical disorder, head injury or visual impairment, in which case the test should not be administered. In New Jersey, this test is not considered scientifically reliable and it cannot be admitted as proof of intoxication at trial.

The Walk and Turn

This test involves walking a straight line, heel to toe. Signs of impairment include not keeping balance while instructions are being given, starting before the officer instructs you to, stopping while walking, missing the heel to toe step, stepping off the line, using arms to balance, turning improperly or taking the wrong number of steps. Certain factors create good reasons for challenging the results of this test—for example if a person has balancing problems, is overweight, elderly, wearing high heels, has a knee injury, or if the test is conducted in a bad area such as poor lighting, garbage in the road, or an uneven road surface.

The One-Leg Stand

Officers will require a driver to stand with his or her arms down, and lift one foot six inches off the ground with pointed toes, looking down at the raised foot while counting out loud (one thousand and one, one thousand and two, one thousand and three, etc.) for thirty seconds. Signs of impairment include swaying, use of arms to balance, hopping or putting down a foot. Again, many people are not good candidates for this test. Advanced age, health conditions, inappropriate footwear or terrain all call the reliability of this test into question.

There is no statutory penalty for refusing to perform a field sobriety test, however if you do refuse, a judge is allowed to treat your refusal to do them as if you were too drunk to do them, so make sure you do the tests if asked.

On paper, these field sobriety tests seem simple enough. But are they? It’s late at night, you are tired, police cars are flashing lights, you are surrounded by police with flashlights pointed at you. It quickly becomes a very intimidating experience as you are wondering to yourself if you are going to lose your license and go to jail. This is exactly why if you find yourself in this situation, you need to contact us immediately.

Top New Jersey DWI Lawyer Edward M. Janzekovich Defends Against Invalid Field Sobriety Test Results

Hiring the right New Jersey drunk driving lawyer can mean the difference between a life altering conviction, or a mere bump in the road of your life. To discuss your case, call us at 732-257-1137 or contact us online today. We serve clients in Ocean County, Monmouth County, Mercer County, Middlesex County, Union County and Somerset County.

Filed Under: Criminal Law, Drunk Driving, DWI - DUI, Field Sobriety Tests, New Jersey Attorney Tagged With: DUI – DWI Defense Attorney, dui attorney, East Brunswick DWI Attorney, Field Sobriety Tests, Field Sobriety Tests Attorney, Field Sobriety Tests DUI, Field Sobriety Tests DWI, Field Sobriety Tests New Jersey, new jersey drunk driving attorney, nj dwi attorney, Union Township DUI Charge, Union Township DUI DWI, Union Township NJ DWI Attorney

New Jersey Appellate Court Rejects DWI – DUI Refusal Challenge

January 29, 2016 by EMJanzekovich

On January 28, 2016 a New Jersey Appellate Court rejects a DWI / DUI refusal challenge that the Standard Statement police are required to read is defective. The argument is that the Statement does not fully advise a person in custody for suspected DWI / DUI of the exact potential penalties they will be charged with if they refuse to provide a breath sample for testing to determine if they are drunk driving in New Jersey.

The defendant argued that “she should have been told that the mandatory minimum license revocation would be seven months,” and that “up to 20 years can mean anywhere between 0 days to 20 years.” She also challenged that she should have been told the mandatory minimum fine would be between $300 and $500, and that it would result in her having to install an ignition interlock device in her vehicle for a certain period of time.

In reality, the situation does potentially get even more confusing because in New Jersey – when a person is arrested for suspected DWI / DUI – most times, just prior to being read this Statement, they are also advised of their Miranda Rights, and the police then have them sign a rights card. Miranda says you have a right to remain silent, and the right to have an attorney. Then one minute later, you are read the Statement, which says you have no legal right to have an attorney, that you cannot remain silent, and that you must answer the question.

The take away from this, do not drink and drive, but if you are asked to provide a breath sample by a law enforcement officer, provide it, then hire a New Jersey DWI / DUI lawyer / attorney to help you. (you must supply at a minimum 2 good breath samples for the Alcotest to generate a test result and avoid a refusal charge.)

janz

Click the below link for the sourced article from the New Jersey Law Journal – January 28, 2016 by Michael Booth

NJ Court Rejects Challenge to Breath-Test Refusal Warnings

Contact DUI – DWI Defense Attorney Edward M. Janzekovich

To schedule a free initial consultation, contact my office online or call us at 732-257-1137. Evening and weekend consultations are available by appointment. I accept all major credit cards.

The Office of Edward M. Janzekovich can help if you have been arrested and charged with DWI / DUI in Union County, Ocean County, Monmouth County, Middlesex County, Burlington County, Mercer County & Somerset County.

We also serve the New Jersey cities of Union, Dover, Brick, Jackson, Wall, Woodbridge, East Brunswick, Evesham, Howell, Robbinsville, Bound Brook, Neptune, Hamilton, Linden City, Bridgewater & Tinton Falls.

Filed Under: Criminal Law, Current Events, Drunk Driving, DWI - DUI, New Jersey Appellate Court Decisions, New Jersey Attorney, Refusal to Submit a Breath Sample Tagged With: criminal attorney new jersey, current events, drunk driving, DUI – DWI Defense Attorney, dui attorney, dwi, East Brunswick DUI Attorney, East Brunswick DWI Attorney, New Jersey Appellate Court, New Jersey Appellate Court DUI, New Jersey Appellate Court DWI, New Jersey Appellate Court DWI Refusal, new jersey drunk driving attorney, new jersey dui lawyer, new jersey dui refusal, new jersey dwi refusal, New Jersey Refusal to Submit, nj dwi refusal attorney, Union Township DUI DWI, Union Township NJ DWI Attorney

Allowing a Drunk Driver to Operate a Motor Vehicle in NJ

September 8, 2015 by EMJanzekovich

Most people are aware that if they operate a motor vehicle while intoxicated, they can be charged with a DWI offense. But what very few people are aware of is that even if you are not driving the vehicle, you could still be found guilty of a DWI violation.

The New Jersey DWI statute is NJSA 39:4-50. Section (A) of this statute states: Except as provided in subsection (g) (school zone) of this section, a person who operates a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, narcotic, hallucinogenic or habit-producing drug, or operates a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration of.08% or more by weight of alcohol in the defendants blood or permits another person who is under the influence of intoxicating liquor, narcotic, hallucinogenic or habit-producing drug to operate a motor vehicle owned by him or in his custody or control or permits another to operate a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration of.08% or more by weight of alcohol in the defendants blood shall be subject : The penalties are all exactly the same regardless if you are driving drunk or allowing a person to drive drunk. The New jersey Supreme Court holds the Allowing offense at the same level of responsibility as the act of actual drunk driving, banning any plea bargaining, adhering to the Zero Tolerance policy. In State v Hessan, the Court said ” The act of unleashing a drunk driver onto the highways creates the very risk to the safety of other drivers and the public that is posed by the intoxicated driver.” However, on an Allowing offense, the State has to prove additional different elements than the original DWI charge.

The State has to prove that the person being charged with the allowing offense had owned the vehicle or had custody and control over it. The State also has to prove that the person being charged with the allowing offense had knowledge of the intoxication of the driver and had their consent to operate the vehicle. These elements are not so easy to prove at times.

A typical scenario for an allowing a drunk driver to operate a motor vehicle violation is when two or more friends go out drinking. At the end of the night, the driver tells the passengers that he is too drunk to drive home, and one of the passengers decide to drive home because they are only buzzed. The police stop the vehicle, the drunk owner is sound asleep in the passenger seat completely unaware as to what is happening. Both are arrested and charged with DWI. The same scenario happens if the registered owner of the vehicle is completely sober, in the passenger seat, but the driver is intoxicated. This is typically a husband and wife scenario in the vehicle.

If you or a loved one has been charged with an Allowing offense, you should hire a lawyer whose sole practice specializes in DWI / DUI defense. The facts and circumstances surrounding the allegation of the charge need to be closely examined to identify available defenses and mitigating factors.

The Law Office of Edward M. Janzekovich is a law firm with a sole focus of defending persons charged with DWI / DUI related offenses. The defense strategy used is to identify legal discrepancies in police procedure that implicate constitutional, medical, scientific or evidentiary issues, with the motor vehicle stop, field sobriety tests and blood alcohol tests.

Filed Under: Drunk Driving, DWI - DUI Tagged With: alcohol blood testing new jersey, drinking driving new jersey, drunk driving, dui attorney, dwi, implied consent, new jersey alcotest, new jersey drunk driving attorney, new jersey dui lawyer

Drunk Driving Discovery

October 26, 2012 by EMJanzekovich

CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE — DISCOVERY — DRUNK DRIVING

14-2-8052 State v. Carrero, App. Div. (Sabatino, J.A.D.) (28 pp.) We review discovery orders separately issued in these two DWI cases authorizing defense counsel and/or defense experts to inspect and photograph rooms within the police stations where their respective clients provided breath samples on the Alcotest device in order to verify that the tests were properly administered. In Carrero, such access was granted to help ascertain whether devices emitting radio frequency interference (RFI) had been located in the station within 100 feet of the testing area. In Baluski, such access was granted to help ascertain whether the interior layout of the station physically prevented defendant from being observed for the required 20 minutes before testing. We reverse the discovery orders because neither defendant has shown a reasonable justification to conduct the requested inspection. We conclude that Carrero’s request is insufficient in light of the Supreme Court’s binding legal and evidentiary determination in State v. Chun, 194 N.J. 54, 89, cert. denied, 555 U.S. 825, 129 S.Ct. 158, 172 L.Ed.2d 41 (2008), that the Alcotest is designed in a manner that is “well shielded from the impact of any potential RFI,” and also in light of the state’s countervailing security interests disfavoring routine civilian access to the interior of a police station.

We conclude that Baluski’s request is likewise insufficient because he has presented no affirmative basis to believe that an officer failed to observe him for the 20 pretesting minutes required by Chun, 194 N.J. at 79, and also in light of the state’s countervailing security interests.

Source – NJSBA Daily Briefing

Filed Under: Criminal Law, Drunk Driving, DWI - DUI Tagged With: drinking and driving, dui attorney, dwi attorney, new jersey drunk driving attorney

AUTOMOBILES — DRUNK DRIVING — LICENSE SUSPENSION

October 25, 2012 by EMJanzekovich

05-2-8058 Foehner v. New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission, App. Div. (per curiam) (5 pp.) Appellant Robert Foehner appeals from the Motor Vehicle Commission’s (MVC) denial of an administrative hearing before imposing a 3,650-day suspension of his driver’s license due to a fourth conviction for an alcohol-related offense. The MVC asserts that appellant was convicted of his first DUI on May 28, 1986, his second on November 2, 1990, his third on December 19, 1992, and the fourth on September 21, 2011. The first three offenses occurred in New Jersey; the fourth occurred in Arizona.

On appeal, appellant notes that the driving history provided with the notice of suspension contained only one prior alcohol-related motor vehicle offense dating back to December 19, 1992. He argues that, as a matter of procedural due process, he is entitled to an agency hearing to evaluate the legal and factual bases for the imposition of a 3,650-day suspension. The appellate panel disagrees and affirms the suspension. Appellant does not contest that he has been convicted of DUI on four occasions, nor does he raise any legal issues to be addressed by the MVC. Rather, appellant merely contends that the MVC did not provide him with proof of all four of his DUI convictions when it initially issued the suspension notice. Since no disputed issues of material fact existed, and no legal issues were raised, no evidentiary hearing was required before the mandatory suspension was imposed.