DRUG LAWS IN BERGEN AND PASSAIC COUNTIES: MIRANDA WARNINGS IN A DRUG RELATED STOP

A week or so ago the New Jersey’s Supreme Court ruled that a passenger in a motor vehicle stop could not suppress information given by a driver about the existence of drugs in an automobile where the driver’s constitutional rights were infringed because the interrogation was unduly long and coercive.

The driver and passenger were stopped by a local law enforcement agent who noticed that the vehicle did not have an inspection sticker. In addition, the driver was not in possession of a license or an insurance card. Thereafter, the driver and passenger were questioned separately. That interrogation produced inconsistent information. The investigating police officer told the driver that he thought that the vehicle contained drugs. The driver then disclosed the location of marijuana and cocaine in the car. Both the passenger and the driver were charged with possession of drugs.

Prior to trial, the passenger filed a motion seeking to suppress the statement made by the driver as to the location of the drugs, contending that the interrogation offended certain constitutional protections including those contained in Miranda v. Arizona. The trial court suppressed the statement and as a result, the use of the drugs seized in the motor vehicle could not be used at trial. The Appellate Division reversed that decision. The Supreme Court affirmed.