New Jersey DUI Lawyer – Supreme Court Questions Whether Drivers Can Be Forced to Take a Breathalyzer Test Without a Warrant

Last month, the United States Supreme Court addressed whether police can require drivers to take a “deep-lung” breath test without a search warrant. Three cases out of Minnesota and North Dakota were joined and brought before the Court. These states have laws that make it a crime for drivers to refuse to take a breathalyzer, urine, or blood test. Eleven other states have similar laws, including Alaska, Florida, Hawaii, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Vermont and Virginia. A majority of the justices questioned whether these laws criminalizing refusal are constitutional, in light of an individual’s Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.

Generally speaking, the police cannot search a driver or their car after an arrest without first getting a search warrant, unless it is for their own personal safety or to preserve evidence. In 2013, the Supreme Court ruled that police cannot conduct blood tests for drunken driving without first obtaining a warrant. However, some justices remain hesitant to apply the same rule to the breathalyzer test, because it is less intrusive than drawing blood.

Previously in North Dakota, refusal to submit to a chemical test carried only civil penalties, such as the suspension or revocation of one’s license. However in 2013, North Dakota lawmakers passed legislation to make penalties for drunk driving offenses more severe—in part by punishing a refusal to take a breathalyzer test in the same manner as it punishes the crime of driving under the influence.

The groups backing the states’ laws, including Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), have argued that when a person applies for a driver’s license, they give their implied consent to be subjected to a chemical test in the event that they are arrested for suspected drunk driving.

However, several groups backing the defendants, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the DUI Defense Lawyers Association (DDLA), have argued that the government cannot criminalize conduct protected by the Fourth Amendment. One cannot truly give “implied consent” to take a breathalyzer test when they get their license if they know that they will face criminal sanctions for refusing to take the test. The DDLA argued that there are better ways to deter drunk driving, including creating an electronic warrant system, setting up sobriety checkpoints, providing alcohol abuse treatment, and requiring the use of ignition interlock devices for convicted drunk drivers.

So how did the justices come down on the issue? Justice Samuel Alito was the only justice who seemed to be strongly in favor of criminalizing refusal, and he emphasized that breathalyzer tests are only a minimal intrusion. He expressed that the only reason people don’t want to submit to a breathalyzer test is because they don’t want their blood alcohol measured, it is not that they object to blowing into a straw. Justice Kagan seemed to agree with this line of reasoning, noting that police have an interest in testing a driver’s breath as quickly as possible, before their blood alcohol content (BAC) goes down.

Ultimately, the states were unable to come up with a persuasive reason why police cannot secure a warrant while transporting suspects to the police station or hospital for testing. Forty states now utilize electronic warrant systems.

Although it is not a crime to refuse to take a breathalyzer test in New Jersey, there are harsh civil penalties, including fines, motor vehicles surcharges, a long suspension of driving privileges and special sentencing enhancements if the refusal occurs within a school zone. A refusal can also be used to draw an inference of guilt in a DUI trial. If you are pulled over in New Jersey for a suspected DUI, the police can detain you and bring you to a hospital where staff may draw blood.

New Jersey DUI/DWI Lawyer Edward M. Janzekovich Represents Drivers Who Have Refused Chemical Testing

If you were arrested for drunk driving and refused to submit to chemical testing, you are likely facing steep penalties. In addition to a DWI charge, you are probably also facing penalties for refusing to take the breathalyzer test. To speak to an experienced New Jersey DUI lawyer and begin building your defense, call the Law Office of Edward M. Janzekovich at 732-257-1137 or contact us online today. We represent clients throughout New Jersey, including 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.