Field Sobriety Tests in New Jersey

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.

New Jersey Appellate Court Rejects DWI – DUI Refusal Challenge

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 thatshe 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.

 

The Ignition Interlock Device – New Jersey DWI, DUI or Refusal to Submit a Breath Sample

DWI-DUI Charges in New Jersey

In New Jersey, if you are convicted or plead guilty to a DWI / DUI or Refusal to Submit a Breath Sample, most likely you will have to install an ignition interlock device in your car. The device essentially works as a bypass to the ignition of your vehicle which requires a breath sample to be supplied before the vehicle will start. It will also require periodic samples as the vehicle is operated for longer time frames to keep it running so as to ensure the operator is not consuming alcohol after the initial start up.

As a first offender with less than a .15% BAC (blood alcohol concentration), the sentencing judge is not mandated to have you install it, although he or she may depending on surrounding circumstances of your incident. Once your BAC reaches .15%, the judge is mandated to order the installation of the device into the vehicle principally operated. The device must be installed all through the period of suspension and an additional six months to one year (judge discretion) after you get your license back.

A first offender who refused to submit a breath sample will be required to install an ignition interlock device as well, with the rationale that the breath sample would have been a .15% BAC or higher. Another reason to provide a breath sample – but most people learn of this incentive after the fact.

As a second offender, it does not matter what your blood alcohol concentration was as long as it was a minimum of .08% BAC. The license suspension for a second offender is 2 years, and the device must be installed in the vehicle principally operated during the entire period of license suspension and an additional one to three years (judge discretion) after you get your license restored.

As a third offender, it does not matter what your blood alcohol concentration was as long as it was a minimum of .08% BAC. The license suspension for a third offender is ten years, and the device must be installed in the vehicle principally operated during the entire period of license suspension and an additional one to three years (judge discretion) after you get your license restored.

A common question is, why do I have to put this device in my car during the period of suspension if I cannot drive anyway. That answer is not clear. Other states have interlock laws and penalties for DWI, and it appears New Jersey copied the laws from other states. The discrepancy is that other states allow you to drive during the period of suspension for very limited reasons.

Other states will grant a very limited purpose license to travel to work or school, and most require you to install an ignition interlock device in your vehicle prior to being granted that class. New Jersey does not offer a temporary, hardship or work only license, as many other states do.

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.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Happy Thanksgiving!

Contact DUI / DWI Defense Attorney Edward M. Janzekovich

Contact me online or call my office at 732-257-1137 to arrange a free initial consultation. I am available evenings and weekends upon request. All major credit cards are welcome.

The Law Office of Edward M. Janzekovich serves all of Middlesex County including Edison Township, Woodbridge Township, Old Bridge Township, Piscataway Township, New Brunswick, Perth Amboy, East Brunswick Township, South Brunswick Township, Sayreville, North Brunswick Township, Monroe Township, South Plainfield, Plainsboro Township, Carteret & South River, NJ.

Police Can Search Your Car Without a Warrant…Again.

No Warrant Required

Today, the New Jersey Supreme Court just reversed its position on the Warrant Requirement for searches of motor vehicles. NJ Supreme Court ruled in 2009 that police must obtain a warrant to search a motor vehicle, unless exigent circumstances were present. State v Pena Flores (2009).

This morning they decided in State v Witt, that the exigent circumstances standard set forth in Pena-Flores was unsound in principle and unworkable in practice to obtain warrants. They ruled that: The Automobile Exception authorizes the warrantless search of an automobile only when the police have probable cause to believe that the vehicle contains contraband or evidence of an offense and the circumstances giving rise to probable cause are unforeseeable and spontaneous.

The Pena-Flores rule basically required police to request consent to search the vehicle from the owner/operator of the vehicle if probable cause was present, and if denied, they could apply for a telephonic warrant to search the vehicle.  Consent is no longer required.

Implied Consent

Most people are aware that if they are stopped by law enforcement and there is reasonable suspicion that they are driving while intoxicated, the driver is required to provide a sample to determine if they are under the influence, but a sample of what?  The law varies from state to state.  For instance:

The Implied Consent Law in New Jersey is different than that of Rhode Island.  In Rhode Island, Implied Consent means that any person who drives a motor vehicle in Rhode Island has given consent to Chemical Test (Breath-Blood-Urine – arresting officers choice apparently) to determine the amount of alcohol/drugs, if any,  in your system after you have been arrested for suspected driving while intoxicated (DWI).   Refusing to provide that sample is an additional charge carrying additional license suspensions and fines. (source – RI DMV website)

The New Jersey Implied Consent Law that states that all persons operating a motor vehicle on New Jersey roadways has agreed to submit to a Breath Test following an arrest for suspected drinking and driving.  In addition to the original underlying penalties of the driving while intoxicated offense, failing to provide a breath sample will result in an additional charge carrying an additional period of suspension and other penalties.

However, New Jersey’s implied consent law does not currently mandate that you submit to a blood test or urine test.  If taken to the hospital as a result of an investigation, such as an accident, you most likely did not perform standardized field sobriety tests.  If you are suspected of being under the influence of an alcohol or drug, you will be asked for your consent to voluntarily provide a sample of your blood or urine to test.  This is because although the breath test machine used in New Jersey, the Alcotest 7110c, is designed to be mobile and transportable to the scene or hospital, it is not the practice in New Jersey.  So to gather evidence of intoxication to be used against you, your blood or urine will be required.

If you believe you have alcohol or drugs in your system, or if you just do not want to, you should refuse to voluntarily give consent for the collection of your blood or urine.  If a DWI charge is to be pursued against you, a judge would have to issue a warrant (Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures – barring exigent circumstances) for non-consensual blood testing to collect a sample. However, if a warrant is obtained, you are legally required to provide the type of sample described in the warrant and reasonable force may be used to collect that sample if necessary.  Refusing to provide a sample after a warrant is issued will result in an additional charge(s) carrying additional license suspensions and penalties, which may also expose you to potential criminal charges.

So, according to the Rhode Island Division of Motor Vehicle website, a New Jersey resident on vacation, visiting a relative or just driving through Rhode Island that is stopped for a suspected DWI is required to submit to chemical testing.  Chemical testing of your breath, blood or urine, without the need of a warrant, even though as a New Jersey license holder, your implied consent requirements are for only breath samples.

* Disclaimer – Edward Janzekovich is a licensed attorney in the State of New Jersey and not in Rhode Island.  The information provided is to contrast implied consent laws between NJ and RI. Information is obtained directly from the Rhode Island DMV website and this is not to be interpreted as providing Rhode Island legal advice.

CRIME VICTIMS GET GREATER ROLE IN PROSECUTION OF THEIR CASES

New Jersey has enacted a law giving victims greater involvement in the prosecution of criminal cases, especially in the plea-bargaining process. The law, signed Tuesday, supplements an existing bill of rights by allowing victims to attend judicial or juvenile proceedings concerning the crime and to appear in any proceedings that implicate their rights. It also gives them standing to file a motion or to present argument on a motion filed by someone else in order to enforce their rights.

They will have a right to consult with the prosecution before any plea agreement can be reached, and the prosecutor must inform the court about the conversation and say whether the victim approves of the plea deal.

Source – NJSBA Daily Briefing

CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE

14-2-7046 State v. Barfuss, App. Div. (per curiam) (12 pp.) Defendant appeals from the Law Division order denying his post-sentence motion to vacate his guilty plea to Driving Under the Influence (DUI). defendant contends that he should be allowed to vacate the guilty plea because the factual basis in support of his plea was inadequate to prove that he “operated” the vehicle as required by the DUI statute. The appellate panel agrees and reverses. The record does not contain any evidence that defendant made any “physical movement to put the car in motion” at the time.

Unable to find any New Jersey cases upholding a conviction for DUI for having the keys in one’s pocket and a future intent to drive home without any corroborating physical attempt to move the vehicle, the panel concludes that the facts articulated by defendant did not provide an adequate factual basis for his guilty plea. After balancing the four Slater factors, the panel finds that defendant has met his burden and is entitled to withdraw his guilty plea and have the charges reinstated to correct a manifest injustice.

Source – NJSBA Daily Briefing