Download Flash Player to view these books.

DRUNK DRIVING LAW IN NEW JERSEY: THE ARTICUABLE SUSPICION AND PROBABLE CAUSE STANDARDS

There are usually two major factual considerations in drunk driving (DWI/DUI) cases. The first relates to the events that precipitated the stop of the motor vehicle. The second relates to the investigating police officer’s decision to arrest, which usually triggers the demand for a breath test. In each of these events, the government will have the responsibility to justify its agent’s decision at trial. That justification is based on two separate and distinct standards of proof. If the government fails in its responsibility on either issue, all evidence that follows the event can be suppressed.

1. The Stop

Most DWI/DUI cases begin with a motor vehicle stop where a police officer believes that a motor vehicle offense has occurred. In order to justify a motor vehicle stop under those circumstances, the government must show that the police officer had an “articuable suspicion” to make the stop. Articuable suspicion can be based upon a police officer’s assessment of the totality of the circumstances, including his experience, observations and any rational inferences that can be drawn from those observations. Articuable suspicion is a standard of proof that is lower than the probable cause standard needed to sustain an arrest, which is further developed below. Notably, under the articuable suspicion standard, the police officer does not have to prove that the driver actually committed a motor vehicle violation. It is sufficient to show that there was a reasonable suspicion that the offense occurred.

Articuable suspicion has been found to exist where the police officer relied upon an anonymous 911 tip, if some corroborative information is provided in the tip. (i.e. the make, model or color of the vehicle).

In addition, articuable suspicion has been found where a driver twice crossed a yellow line separating a lane of traffic from the shoulder of the road (239 N.J. Super, 206) or where a driver makes a U-turn even under circumstances where the maneuver does not endanger another driver. A motor vehicle stop was also justified under the articuable suspicion standard where the stop was made where the driver’s motor vehicle had an expired inspection sticker (2007 WL 4462579).

2. The Arrest

Like the articuable suspicion standard, the standard of proof known as probable cause does not lend itself to a precise definition. At times, it has been defined as “ a well grounded suspicion that a crime has been or is being committed.” At other times it has been said that probable cause exists if a person of “reasonable caution” can conclude that a crime has occurred or is about to occur. The core of all the definitions associated with the concept of probable cause is whether the police officer’s decision to arrest was “objectively reasonable.”

Probable cause has been found in DWI/DUI cases under the following circumstances:

a) An odor of alcohol about the subject’s breath; slowed and slurred speech; trouble retrieving thoughts and an admission about drinking alcohol;

b) An odor of alcohol about the subject’s breath; slowed and slurred speech; bloodshot and watery eyes; and, mussed clothes;

c) An odor of alcohol about the subject’s breath; slowed and slurred speech; bloodshot and watery eyes; and, the subject’s uncertainty about the cause of a motor vehicle accident.

Each of these issues must be carefully examined by your trial counsel in order to preserve your best interests in a DWI/DUI case.

Loading

Name *

Phone *

Email *

Tell us more *

Frank T. Luciano, PC
147 Main Street, Suite 5
Lodi, NJ 07644
Phone: (973) 471-0004
Get Directions