DRUNK DRIVING (DWI/DUI) LAWYER IN BERGEN AND PASSAIC COUNTIES: A PRIOR REFUSAL CONVICTION CAN INCREASE PENALTIES FOR A SUBSEQUENT DWI/DUI CONVICTION

DRUNK DRIVING (DWI/DUI) IN BERGEN AND PASSAIC COUNTIES: DRUNKEN IDLING

Drunk Driving (DWI/DUI) in Bergen County: The Alcotest and The Responsibility to Recalibrate Every Six Months

DRUNK DRIVING (DWI/DUI) IN BERGEN COUNTY:

THE ALCOTEST AND THE RESPONSIBILITY TO

RECALIBRATE EVERY SIX MONTHS

In 2008, the New Jersey Supreme Court rendered a decision titled State v. Chun. In that case the court authorized the use of the Alcotest breathalyzer in drunk driving prosecutions where certain conditions have been met. One of those conditions required the government to establish that the Alcotest had undergone a semi-annual recalibration.

In a recent Appellate Division case titled State v. Pollock, the defendant contended that the results of the Alcotest should not have been admitted into evidence during his trial because the equipment used in his case had been recalibrated seven months prior to his arrest. The appellate court rejected the defendant’s argument and concluded that the semi-annual recalibration condition required by the Supreme Court in State v. Chun did not apply to a defendant who was convicted prior to the decision in Chun or where the sentencing of a defendant had been deferred pending the ruling of the Chun case. In support of its position, the court observed that the language contained in the Order that issued by the Supreme Court in Chun which required the six month recalibration responsibility suggested a prospective application only.

The Alcotest in New Jersey: The Twenty Minute Wait

Last year, New Jersey’s Supreme Court rendered a well-integrated decision that identified the conditions associated with the admissibility at trial of the result of an AlCOTEST in a drunk driving (DWI/DUI ) prosecution. One of those conditions required the government to observe the defendant for a period of twenty minutes before administering the test. The purpose of this observation period is to determine whether the subject burped, regurgitated, or ingested anything which are all events that can effect the reliability of the equipment.

Recently, a Mercer County Judge reversed a drunk driving conviction where two police officers alternated their watch of a defendant, where only one could remember what he saw. The Judge concluded that the twenty minute observation period was a necessary element of the government’s case and that it had to be proven by clear and convincing evidence.

I have recently published a book titled: "New Jersey’s DWI Survivor’s Guide" which you can download on my website at www.ftlucianolaw.com. There is other information on this subject located in the Library Section of this website.