Posts Tagged ‘DWI’
An Officer Can Access the Information on Their Mobile Data Terminal (MDT) Randomly, Without Reasonable Suspicion
State v. Carrigan Appellate Docket No.: A-1252-19 Decided August 10, 2021 Submitted by New Jersey DWI Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark. In a recent unpublished opinion, the Appellate Division of New Jersey ruled an officer can access the information on their mobile data terminal (MDT) randomly, without reasonable suspicion that a traffic offense is being committed. In State…
Read MoreFor a DUI or DWI in New Jersey, the Accused Must Be Observed for Twenty Minutes Uninterrupted
State v. Bruno Docket No. A-1144-19 Decided June 29, 2021 Submitted by New Jersey DWI Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark. In a recent unpublished decision the Appellate Division of New Jersey affirmed defendant’s guilty plea to a driving while intoxicated (DWI) after defendant challenged the twenty-minute observation period prior to the Alcotest breathalyzer. In Bruno, as part of…
Read MoreFailure of A Judge to Advise You About Increased Penalties for Future DUI’s, Will Not Prevent Those Increased Penalties from Being Applied
State v. Lukens Appellate Docket No.: A-0458-20 Decided April 13, 2021 Submitted by New Jersey DWI Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark. In an unpublished opinion, the Appellate Division of New Jersey reviewed whether the failure to warn defendant of increased penalties, including six months imprisonment for a conviction of a third driving while intoxicated (DUI), during the plea…
Read MoreWindow Tint Will Almost Always Be Grounds for Police to Pull You Over
State v. Cohen Appellate Docket No.: A-0210-19 Decided April 5, 2021 Submitted by New Jersey DWI Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark. In a recent unpublished opinion, the Appellate Division of New Jersey reviewed whether a police traffic stop was lawful when police believed there was window tint even though there actually was not unlawful tint. In State v.…
Read MoreState v. Fagg | New Jersey Appellate Division unpublished Decision: Filed: 2021-01-08
Submitted by New Jersey DWI Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark. Michale Fagg appeals his conviction of driving while intoxicated DWI. At around 1:30 AM, witness Jill Muriithi noticed that a vehicle was parked at the entrance of the parking lot of her apartment complex. The vehicle was just sitting there with its lights on. She had to pull…
Read More2019 Proposed DWI legislation sitting on Governor Murphy’s desk
Bill Text: NJ A2089 | 2018-2019 | Regular Session | Introduced | LegiScan Revises penalties for drunk driving and ignition interlock device violations. An Act concerning drunk driving and ignition interlock devices and amending R.S.3994-50, P.L.1981, c.512, and P.L.1999, c.417. Be It Enacted by the Senate and General Assembly of the State of New Jersey: …
Read MoreJunk Science kicked out of municipal court
Submitted by New Jersey DWI Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark. State Of New Jersey v. Christopher Haas Superior Court Of New Jersey Appellate Division July 3, 2019 (Not For Publication) This is a summary of the final section of this case. It deals with the application of New Jersey’s gate keeping Rule, The Net Opinion Rule, in…
Read MoreUnlawful Possession of Drugs in a Motor Vehicle
State of NJ vs Haas (Not Approved for Publication by the New Jersey Appellate Division July 2, 2019) Submitted by New Jersey Drug Crime Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark. How can the police prove I have certain drugs and can they charge me with unlawful possession or NJSA 39:4-49.1 (Drugs in a Motor Vehicle)? New Jersey’s Net…
Read MoreIntent to Drive and New Jersey DWI Law
State Of New Jersey v. Donna Ebert Submitted by New Jersey DWI Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark. This is a brief summary of a case that occurred in 2002. The question of this case is the intent to drive by the defendant. If you have been charged with a DUI but you were not driving or you…
Read MoreDo I have to spend the entire six months in jail if I am convicted of driving while suspended for a second or greater time during a DWI suspension?
The New Jersey appellate division, in an approved for publication decision, ruled the trial court does not have any discretion to allow a defendant to show up for “nightly incarceration”. The appellate division affirmed the legislature’s mandate of a fixed term of 180 days for the 4th° offense without parole eligibility. In this case the…
Read More