Presented by New Jersey DWI Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark.
Should the defendant’s blood test results be suppressed in light of the U.S.
Supreme Court’s decision in Missouri v. McNeely, 133 S.Ct. 1552, 185 L.Ed.2d
696 (2013), which held that there is no per se rule of exigency in drunk
The New Jersey State Supreme Court has agreed to hear argument on the case and decide if the U.S. Supreme Court decision should be applied to all pending cases at the time of the decision or only those arrests which took place after the decision was made by the Court. That was the issue in State v Adkins. The New Jersey trial court and Appellate Division had determined that McNeely represented a new criminal procedure and hence no retroactive application to pending cases. The issue to be decided by the NJ Supreme Court is whether there should be ‘pipeline retroactivity’ because the decision by the U.S. Supreme court in McNeely vs. Missouri was merely the extension of existing Criminal procedure law or an entirely new criminal procedure.
See also State vs. Noah Pressler decision