Thomas Hugh Martin Esq.

New Jersey Attorney – Criminal, Traffic & DWI

What Can A Sea Bright DWI Attorney Do For Me?

Hiring an experienced Sea Bright DWI lawyer is the most important decision you can make if you have been charged with DWI under N.J.S.A. 39:4-50 or refusal to submit or consent to a breath test under N.J.S.A 39:4-50.2. The value of a knowledgeable Sea Bright DWI lawyer is two fold. First, I will obtain all of the evidence that the Prosecutor seeks to introduce against you and evaluate same. Second, I will be in a position to file Motions to dismiss your charges if applicable or try your case aggressively and properly to the Judge that will be deciding your fait.

DWI Lawyer Thomas H. Martin has tried DWI cases all over New Jersey and has been successful on multiple occasions in having client’s DWI charges dismissed without even the need for trial. The first thing I do when I have been retained as a Sea Bright DWI attorney is to obtain all of the evidence for and against you. I then analyze it looking to spot multiple issues or problems for the Prosecutor. First and foremost, I want to see if the police can actually establish that you were operating a motor vehicle. The issue of operation is fact sensitive. For instance, the Courts have held that being in a car with the motor running to be operation in one case (intent to drive). However, in a separate case, they found that being behind the wheel with the car running was not operation in another case (no intent to drive-car was running solely to keep the person warm). As you can see operation is not such a straight forward issue. If there is reasonable doubt as to whether you operated your vehicle, then the Judge must find you not guilty.

The next issue I examine in your Sea Bright driving while intoxicated case is whether the police had a reasonable and articulable suspicion to stop your vehicle. The Police simply cannot stop your car because you are the only car on the road after the bars let out. What this means is that the police must believe that you have committed a motor vehicle offense, or are about to commit a crime, or the police are acting in their role as a commuter caretaker before they can stop you. One example of an invalid stop was where the police were behind an individual at a red light. When the light turned green, the motorist did not commence driving for 5 to 10 seconds. State v Cryan. The Court ruled that the police did not have a valid excuse to stop the vehicle and ruled the stop unconstitutional. As such, all evidence obtained after this stop, i.e. physical observations, breath tests, etc. were ruled inadmissible by the Court.

The next issue in your DWI case is whether the police have a reasonable and articulable suspicion to have you perform the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFTS). There are three tests that actually are considered part of the SFTS’s. They are: (1) the walk and turn test; (2) the one leg stand test; and (3) the HGN test-eye examination). Based upon your performance on same, the police may or not may not have a legal basis to arrest you. DWI Attorney Thomas H. Martin is well versed in these tests and knows what to look for. In addition, if my clients can afford it, we mutually retain an expert (a former New Jersey State Police Test Coordinator) to evaluate whether the arresting officer(s) performed the SFTS’s properly. If they didn’t then the arrest and DWI breath results may be ruled inadmissible (thrown out). Further, if the case gets to trial, the expert can raise reasonable doubt as to the Prosecutor’s case or efforts to prove you were drunk based upon his or her physical observations of you.

How Can A Red Bank DWI Lawyer help Me?

Hiring an experienced Red Bank DWI lawyer is the most important decision you can make if you have been charged with DWI under N.J.S.A. 39:4-50 or refusal to submit or consent to a breath test under N.J.S.A 39:4-50.2. The value of a knowledgeable Red Bank DWI lawyer is two-fold. First, he will obtain all of the evidence that the Prosecutor seeks to introduce against you and evaluate same. Second, he will be in a position to file Motions to dismiss your charges if applicable or try your case aggressively and properly to the Judge that will be deciding your fait.

DWI Lawyer Thomas H. Martin has tried DWI cases all over New Jersey and has been successful on multiple occasions in having client’s DWI charges dismissed without even the need for trial. The first thing I do when I have been retained as a Red Bank DWI attorney is to obtain all of the evidence for and against you. I then analyze it looking to spot multiple issues or problems for the Prosecutor. First and foremost, I want to see if the police can actually establish that you were operating a motor vehicle. The issue of operation is fact sensitive. For instance, the Courts have held that being in a car with the motor running to be operation in one case (intent to drive). However, in a separate case, they found that being behind the wheel with the car running was not operation in another case (no intent to drive-car was running solely to keep the person warm). As you can see operation is not such a straight forward issue. If there is reasonable doubt as to whether you operated your vehicle, then the Judge must find you not guilty.

The next issue I examine in your Red Bank driving while intoxicated case is whether the police had a reasonable and articulable suspicion to stop your vehicle. The Police simply cannot stop your car because you are the only car on the road after the bars let out. What this means is that the police must believe that you have committed a motor vehicle offense, or are about to commit a crime, or the police are acting in their role as a commuter caretaker before they can stop you. One example of an invalid stop was where the police were behind an individual at a red light. When the light turned green, the motorist did not commence driving for 5 to 10 seconds. State v Cryan. The Court ruled that the police did not have a valid excuse to stop the vehicle and ruled the stop unconstitutional. As such, all evidence obtained after this stop, i.e. physical observations, breath tests, etc. were ruled inadmissible by the Court.

The next issue in your DWI case is whether the police have a reasonable and articulable suspicion to have you perform the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFTS). There are three tests that actually are considered part of the SFTS’s. They are: (1) the walk and turn test; (2) the one leg stand test; and (3) the HGN test-eye examination). Based upon your performance on same, the police may or not may not have a legal basis to arrest you. DWI Attorney Thomas H. Martin is well versed in these tests and knows what to look for. In addition, if my clients can afford it, we mutually retain an expert (a former New Jersey State Police Test Coordinator) to evaluate whether the arresting officer(s) performed the SFTS’s properly. If they didn’t then the arrest and DWI breath results may be ruled inadmissible (thrown out). Further, if the case gets to trial, the expert can raise reasonable doubt as to the Prosecutor’s case or efforts to prove you were drunk based upon his or her physical observations of you.

If you have been arrested and are being brought to the police station for a breath test, there are multiple issues that can be exploited to have your breath tests excluded as evidence. The following examples are illustrative and not exhaustive. They are: (1) was the test performed in a reasonable amount of time after the arrest; (2) was the officer certified to conduct the Alcotest; (3) was the test performed according to proper protocol; (4) did the officer implement the test properly; (5) did the officer observe you for 20 minutes to make sure you didn’t introduce alcohol into your oral activity via burp or gas prior to you taking the test; (6) did the officer change the mouth piece after each test he administered; (7) was the machine calibrated properly; (8) were there electronic devices with in the test area; (9) were the test results within the required tolerance range; (10) did the repair records reveal that the machine was not working properly prior to your test; and (11) did the prosecutor turn over all evidence in a timely matter.

The list can go on ad infinitum, but these are some of the main issues Thomas H. Martin, Esq. and his experts can address which can help you defeat your Red Bank DWI. While I did not address a DWI based upon being under the influence of drugs, many of these same issues would be applicable. If you have been charged with a DWI in  Red   are looking for experienced counsel or you are looking for more information on DWI law, I urge you to contact Thomas H. Martin, Esq. at (732) 431-2224 or view our website.

Howell Drug Possession Charges Lawyer

Have You Been Arrested For Possession of Marijuana, or Possession of Prescription Drugs in Howell?

Drug charges are very serious and can result in a lengthy State Prison Sentence. If you plead guilty or are found guilty of a drug charge, you could suffer expensive fines, probation, a loss of your driver’s license, County Jail and/or State Prison. If you have been arrested and received a summons or complaint for a drug charge in Howell Township, New Jersey, or any other municipality in New Jersey, it is essential that you hire a well-versed and experienced Howell Township, New Jersey criminal defense attorney.

My law firm is conveniently located just a few miles from the Howell Municipal Court, and I have appeared on cases of this nature in the Howell Municipal Court. I have also handled cases that arose in the Howell Court and were transferred to the Monmouth County Superior Court. Howell Police, Monmouth County Sheriffs’ Officers and New Jersey State Police have the authority to charge anyone for possession of any illegal drugs or substances. 

Possession of Marijuana Charges or Paraphernalia Charges.

The Howell Township Municipal Court has the authority to handle possession of marijuana cases involving less than 50 grams of marijuana and/or paraphernalia charges.  Sometimes more serious drug charges can be downgraded and remanded to the Howell Township Municipal Court if the Prosecutor’s Office sees fit.

These types of possession of marijuana or paraphernalia charges result from traffic stops, searches of your person or property incident to arrest, house parties, etc.  Paraphernalia are typically described as rolling papers, bongs, pipes, grinders, bats, etc. The penalties for disorderly person marijuana possession or paraphernalia can be significant, including total fines and surcharges in excess of $1000.00, loss of driving privileges, a record and six months jail. They can also lead to deportation if you are illegal or forfeiture of your public job if you work in government. Typically, first time offenders may be eligible for a diversionary program, such as a conditional discharge if you are in municipal court or pretrial intervention (PTI in Superior Court) if you have in excess of 50 grams of marijuana and/or you are intending to distribute same.

If you have been arrested and charged with possession of marijuana in Howell Township, or else where in New Jersey, it is imperative that you have an experienced Howell drug possession lawyer.  These cases have a variety of defenses that only an attorney will be familiar with. For instance, you may have an illegal search issue, tainted laboratory test results, proof that you didn’t actually, jointly or constructively possess the drugs. As a Howell marijuana possession attorney, I can review all of the evidence presented against you and recommend options for your defense.

Possession of Oxycodone, Percocets and other Prescription Drugs

Charges may also be brought in Howell for unlawful possession of prescription drugs, forging a prescription blank, theft of prescription pad and obtaining CDS by fraud.  These types of charges involving pain killers and/or narcotics have been growing exponentially since the 1990’s.  Persons can even be charged for driving under the influence and/or a Howell DWI if they are operating a vehicle while under the influence of prescription drugs. If you have been found in possession of prescription medication (without a valid prescription), have forged a prescription slip or attempted to obtain CDS by fraud you can be charged with a 3rd degree felony charge.

The consequences associated with these offenses depend on the weight of the drugs possessed. At any rate, if you are convicted of a fourth, third or second degree charge(s), arising out of Howell you are looking at a potential State Prison Sentence.

It is also unlawful for a person to intend to distribute or actually distribute prescription drugs in Howell without a license to do so.  If you are caught having done so, and it was within a 1000’ feet of a school zone or 500’ of a public park or public housing project, you could be  looking at mandatory prison time.  There are many options and defenses to handling these charges which may allow you to avoid prison time.

I have personally handled many drug cases in Howell and throughout New Jersey. I will protect your rights and aggressively pursue all available legal defenses.  The right Howell drug possession lawyer can make all the difference.  Contact our offices for a free consultation.  You can reach us at (732) 431-2224 or e-mail Thomas H. Martin, Esq. or directly attmartin@jerseycriminal.com.  You may also visit our website. Thank you.

Freehold, Eatontown & Toms River Attorney on Penalties for Shoplifting

Grading and Penalties for Shoplifting

Shoplifting tends to be most prevalent in towns with malls. As such, in Monmouth, Middlesex and Ocean Counties, the Freehold Township Municipal Court, Toms River Municipal Court, Eatontown Municipal Court, East Brunswick Municipal Courts and Woodbridge Municipal Courts all tend to handle their fair share of shoplifting charges. If you have a Freehold shoplifting, Toms River shoplifting, Eatontown shoplifting, East Brunswick shoplifting or shoplifting case anywhere in New Jersey, then call you need to speak to an attorney familiar with shoplifting cases in these venues. Under the law, the grading or degree of charge for shoplifting is based on the full retail value of the merchandise taken. Thus, if you have been charged for shoplifting, the severity of the offense is in proportion to the value of the stuff you are accused of trying to conceal or take. Consequently, shoplifting shall be charged in accordance with the full retail value of the merchandise taken, as provided in N.J.S.A. 2C:20-11. 

Under the statute, shoplifting offenses are graded as follows:

2nd Degree: Shoplifting is a crime of the second degree if the full retail value of the merchandise was $75,000.00 or more. N.J.S.A. 2C:20-11c(1). A crime of the second degree is punishable by a term of imprisonment of five to 10 years, a fine not to exceed $150,000.00, or both.

3rd Degree: Shoplifting is a crime of the third degree if the full retail value of the merchandise exceeds $500.00 but is less than $75,000.00. N.J.S.A. 2C:20-11c(2). A crime of the third degree is punishable by a term of imprisonment of  three to five years, a fine not to exceed $15,000.00, or both.  

4th Degree: Shoplifting is a crime of the fourth degree if the full retail value of the merchandise was at least $200.00 but does not exceed $500.00. N.J.S.A. 2C:20-11c(3). A crime of the fourth degree is punishable by a term of imprisonment not to exceed 18 months, a fine not to exceed $10,000 or both.

Disorderly Persons Offense: Shoplifting is a disorderly persons offense if the full retail value of the merchandise was less than $200.00. N.J.S.A. 2C:20-11c(4). A disorderly persons offense is punishable by a term of imprisonment not to exceed six months, a fine not to exceed $1,000 or both.  

The additional mandatory penalties for anyone convicted of shoplifting under the Act are as follows:

Additional Mandatory for a first offense, at least ten days of community service; for a  second offense, at least 15 days of community service; and for a third or subsequent offense, a maximum of 25 days of community service and any person convicted of a third or subsequent shoplifting offense shall serve a minimum term of imprisonment of not less than 90 days.  N.J.S.A. 2C:20-11c(4).

If you have been charged with shoplifting, have questions or fears and are seeking legal representation, then contact Thomas H. Martin, Esq. at (732) 431-2224 who has handled Freehold shoplifting, Toms River shoplifting, Eatontown shoplifting and shoplifting charges all over New Jersey. You can also email us through our website. Mr. Martin has successfully and aggressively handled shoplifting cases in both Superior and Municipal Court.   

 

Freehold Criminal Lawyer: Accused Cop Killer Trial Starts

From APP.COM, 01/13/12

Three days after the first anniversary of the execution of Lakewood police officer Christopher Matlosz residents of Ocean County will file into the county courthouse — potential jurors in the trial of the man accused of killing the policeman, who died in the line of duty.

The process of picking jurors for the trial of Jahmell Crockam is scheduled to begin Tuesday afternoon before Superior Court Judge Wendel E. Daniels, presiding judge of the criminal division in Ocean County.

Crockam, 20, of Edgewood Court, Lakewood, is charged with the murder of Matlosz, 27, a Manchester resident and five-year veteran of the Lakewood police force. Crockam also is charged with weapons offenses.

Freehold Criminal and DWI Lawyer, Thomas H. Martin has experience handling 1000′s of criminal cases of all types in Ocean County and all of New Jersey.   I aggressively litigate all available legal remedies to try to obtain a favorable result for each client.  I provide my experience and knowledge of the law on every case, all of the time.  Please contact my office at (732) 431-2224 or e-mail Tom Martin directly at tmartin@jerseycriminal.com.  You can also visit our website at www.jerseycriminallawyer.com  for more information. Thank you.

Choosing a DUI Lawyer

Choosing a DUI Lawyer

Drivers who have a blood alcohol content (BAC) level of .08 percent or higher are considered drunk and are in violation of the law. If you are pulled over and your BAC exceeds the legal limit, you will likely be arrested. However, there are several legal protections designed to protect people charged with driving under the influence (DUI) or driving while intoxicated (DWI). If the proper procedures were not followed during your arrest process, your rights may have been violated. Only a DUI lawyer can tell you for sure.

DUI Laws

Punishment for DUI and DWI ranges from fines to license suspension to jail time, depending on the severity of the charges. For example, a DUI first offense will likely result in lesser punishment than multiple offenses. If you were involved in a car accident or other motor vehicle accident, the charges may be more severe than if you were pulled over for weaving through traffic. However, if your rights were violated, a DWI attorney may be able to get your sentence reduced, help you keep your driver’s license, or get the charges dropped altogether.

To determine your rights, you will need to hire a lawyer. An experienced DUI lawyer will know who to interview and what issues to look into to determine whether your rights were violated. For example, if the arresting officer failed to read you your Miranda rights, you may be able to get the charges dismissed. In addition, some states’ “implied consent” laws may conflict with your Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination.

Choosing the Right DUI Attorney

Before hiring a DUI lawyer, make sure to do your homework. In some cases you may want to interview more than one DUI attorney. This can help you identify the best attorney for you. Considering the severity of some DUI penalties — ranging from DUI bail costs and fines to license suspension and potential DUI jail time — it is important that you select a qualified lawyer to handle your case. Many DUI lawyers do not charge a fee for the initial consultation.

DUI lawyers whose criminal law practices are dedicated to DWI cases possess the knowledge needed to effectively handle your case. Criminal lawyers specializing in DUI defense have the experience necessary to determine quickly if there are grounds for dismissal of the charges against you, and if not, they can help minimize the severity of the situation and improve your chances of keeping your license by negotiating alternative penalties, such as community service and driving safety classes.

It is always a good idea to check the credentials of any DUI Lawyer you are considering. Ask about the outcomes of their previous cases since success in past cases is a good indication of future success.

Supreme Court Asked to Decide Drug Dog Sniff Case

From Associated Press, 1/3/11

Franky the drug dog’s supersensitive nose is at the heart of a question being put to the U.S. Supreme Court: Does a police dog’s sniff outside a house give officers the right to get asearch warrant for illegal drugs, or is the sniff an unconstitutional search?

Florida’s highest state court has said Franky’s ability to detect marijuana growing inside a Miami-area house from outside a closed front door crossed the constitutional line. The state’s attorney general wants the Supreme Court to reverse that ruling.

The justices could decide this month whether to take the case, the latest dispute about whether the use of dogs to find drugs, explosives and other illegal or dangerous substances violates the Fourth Amendment protection against illegal search and seizure.

Many court watchers expect the justices will take up the case.

“The Florida Supreme Court adopted a very broad reading of the Fourth Amendment that is different from that applied by other courts. It’s an interpretation that a majority of the U.S. Supreme Court will question,” said Tom Goldstein, who publishes the widely read SCOTUSblog website and teaches at the Harvard and Stanford law schools.

The case, Florida v. Jardines, is being closely monitored by law enforcement agencies nationwide, which depend on dogs for a wide range of law enforcement duties.

“Dogs can be a police officer’s best friend because they detect everything from marijuana or meth labs to explosives,” said Kendall Coffey, a former U.S. attorney in Miami now in private practice.

The 8-year-old Franky retired in June after a seven-year career with the Miami-Dade Police Department. He’s responsible for the seizure of more than 2.5 tons of marijuana and $4.9 million in drug-contaminated money. And because he’s an amiable chocolate Labrador, he was used extensively in airports, sports arenas and other places where people congregate.

“He’s a friendly, happy dog,” said his former handler, Detective Douglas Bartelt, who kept Franky after he retired. “People don’t have fear because of his appearance.”

The U.S. Supreme Court has approved drug dog sniffs in several other major cases. Two of those involved dogs that detected drugs during routine traffic stops. In another, a dog found drugs in airport luggage. A fourth involved a drug-laden package in transit.

The Florida case is different because it involves a private residence. The high court has repeatedly emphasized that a home is entitled to greater privacy than cars on the road or a suitcase in an airport. In another major ruling, the justices decided in 2001 that police could not use thermal imaging technology to detect heat from marijuana grow operations from outside a home because the equipment could also detect lawful activity.

“We have said that the Fourth Amendment draws a firm line at the entrance to the house,” the court ruled in that case, known as Kyllo v. United States. The justices added that the thermal devices could detect such intimate details as “at what hour each night the lady of the house takes her daily sauna and bath.”

It’s well-settled that law enforcement officials can walk up to a home and knock on the front door, in hopes that someone will open up and talk. But if a person inside refuses, the officers must get a search warrant — and for that they need evidence of a crime.

On the morning of Dec. 5, 2006, Miami-Dade police detectives and U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration agents set up surveillance outside a house south of the city after getting an anonymous tip that it might contain a marijuana grow operation. Bartelt arrived with Franky. The dog quickly detected the odor of pot at the base of the front door and sat down as he was trained to do.

That sniff was used to get a search warrant from a judge. The house was searched and its lone occupant, Joelis Jardines, was arrested trying to escape out the back door. Officers pulled 179 live marijuana plants from the house, with an estimated street value of more than $700,000.

Jardines, now 39, was charged with marijuana trafficking and grand theft for stealing electricity needed to run the highly sophisticated operation. He pleaded not guilty and his attorney challenged the search, claiming Franky’s sniff outside the front door was an unconstitutional law enforcement intrusion into the home.

The trial judge agreed and threw out the evidence seized in the search, but that was reversed by an intermediate appeals court. In April a divided Florida Supreme Court sided with the original judge.

In its petition to the U.S. Supreme Court, state lawyers argue that the Florida Supreme Court’s decision conflicts with numerous previous rulings that a dog sniff is not a search.

“A dog sniff of a house reveals only that the house contains drugs, not any other private information about the house or the persons in it,” wrote Carolyn Snurkowski, Florida associate deputy attorney general. “A person has no reasonable expectation of privacy in illegal drugs.”

The criminal case against Jardines is on hold until the question involving Franky’s nose is settled. Meanwhile, Jardines is out on bail following a 2010 arrest for alleged armed robbery and aggravated assault. He pleaded not guilty in that one, as well, and trial is set for Feb. 21.

This appeal has the potential to influence the criminal defense of drug cases here in New Jersey.  We will continue to closely monitor developments.

New Jersey DWI Explained

New Jersey DWI Court Process

While every drunk driving case in unique, the process in each case is largely the same.  DWI cases in New Jersey are governed by the New Jersey Court Rules.  As a result, there is a specific process for all DWI cases in New Jersey.

 

Arraignment

After an individual is arrested for DWI, he or she must be arraigned by a municipal court Judge.  This is primarily a procedural formality and nothing substantive typically happens at an Arraignment.  The Arraignment is an opportunity for the Judge to advise the defendant of his or her rights, responsibilities and the potential penalties associated with the DWI charge.  The defendant also enters a plea of “guilty” or “not guilty” at this time.  An application may also be made for the public defender, if the defendant is unable to afford private legal counsel.  Finally, if a defendant is already represented by a lawyer prior to the Arraignment, the Court Rules permit that lawyer to waive the client’s appearance at the DWI Arraignment.

 

Discovery

After the Arraignment, the DWI attorney will request discovery from the municipal court prosecutor.  The prosecutor represents the State of New Jersey in the DWI case against the defendant.  The State is required to give the defendant’s DWI lawyer all relevant discovery.  In essence, discovery means the evidence the State has against the defendant.  Discovery includes police reports, narratives, witness statements, video recordings of the arrest and/or sobriety tests, audio recordings, scientific documents related to the breath-testing machine, photographs and any other evidence the State may use in the case.  An experienced DWI attorney can review all of this discovery and begin to craft a strategy for legal defense of the DWI charges.  Indeed, this is one of the most important phases of a DWI case.

 

Status Conferences

The court will schedule several regular status conferences throughout the DWI case.  These conferences are an opportunity for the DWI lawyer to meet with the municipal prosecutor and discuss the case.  Often the DWI attorney and prosecutor will address issues involving discovery.  Sometimes the defense lawyer and prosecutor will meet with the Judge to talk about the case.  Generally, DWI defendants are required to appear for all status conferences.

 

Motions

Sometimes it becomes necessary for a DWI lawyer to file motions in the municipal court.  A Motion is a formal application to the Court and is the way an attorney seeks particular relief. Motions can be made on a wide variety of issues, including production of discovery, suppression of evidence, barring testimony and dismissal.  As a general rule, Motions in municipal court are made orally.

 

Plea Bargaining

A municipal prosecutor is prohibited by the New Jersey Court Rules from plea bargaining a DWI charge.  This means that prosecutors rarely dismiss a DWI charge unless they believe that the DWI charge cannot be won at trial.  For a prosecutor to believe that a DWI charge cannot be won at trial, a DWI defense lawyer must convince the prosecutor that there are problems with the State’s case.  This will often result in a dismissal of the charge or downgrade to a less serious offense.

 

Trials

If a DWI case cannot be resolved it will proceed to trial.  DWI trials are conducted in the municipal court in which the DWI ticket was issued.   A municipal court Judge will preside over the DWI trial.  Defendants charged with drunk driving in New Jersey are not entitled to a trial by jury.  During the trial, the State has the burden to prove all of the elements of the DWI charge against the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt.  Evidence and witness testimony is introduced by the state and DWI defense lawyer.  Upon completion of the trial, the municipal court Judge will decide if the State proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt and issue a verdict.

 

Appeals

If a defendant is convicted of a DWI, he or she has a right to appeal.  Appealing the conviction may reduce the sentence or may have the charge removed from the record altogether. An appeal is not a retrial.  Rather, it is a reexamination of your case by a higher court to determine if your trial was conducted in a fair manner.  Because DWI law is so complex, it is in a defendant’s best interest to hire an attorney who focuses exclusively on cases of this nature. Time is of the essence during an appeal.  The law limits the time you can appeal a DWI conviction.  In New Jersey, appeal from a DWI conviction is made to the New Jersey Superior Court.  The DWI appeal is venued in the county in which the conviction occurred.  If the defendant loses the DWI appeal in the New Jersey Superior Court, he or she can appeal to the New Jersey Appellate Division.  If the defendant loses the DWI appeal in the New Jersey Appellate Division, he or she can appeal to the New Jersey Supreme Court, which is the highest court in New Jersey.  Below is a chart demonstrating the court hierarchy for DWI appeals:

NJ Supreme Court
1
NJ Appellate Division
1
NJ Superior Court
1
Municipal Court

About New Jersey Theft

New Jersey theft crimes are among the most serious cases. Police and prosecutors aggressively pursue convictions for theft crimes. Theft crimes encompass a broad range of criminal offenses, including misappropriating funds, stealing property or committing fraud.

The manner in which a theft crime is carried out, as well as whether it is violent or non-violent in nature, will often influence the way in which the case is prosecuted. Some theft crimes, such as robbery or burglary, are committed with force or violence.  Shoplifting, on the other hand, is carried out in a more subtle manner with the hopes of not even being noticed.  Fraud is yet another form of theft that involves deceit to carry out the offense.  In some situations, fraud is also referred to as “theft by deception.”

Regardless of the nature of the offense, a theft conviction can have a significant impact on a defendant’s future.  Theft is a crime of moral turpitude.  That means it is a crime that reflect on one’s character.  As a result, convictions can have lifelong consequences.  Indeed, a theft conviction can result in a permanent criminal record.  Since employers routinely conduct background checks, a theft conviction can severely limit employment opportunities.

 

[N.J.S. 2C:20-3. ] Theft by unlawful taking or disposition

a.  Movable property.    A person is guilty of theft if he unlawfully takes, or exercises unlawful control over, movable property of another with purpose to deprive him thereof.

b.  Immovable property.    A person is guilty of theft if he unlawfully transfers any interest in immovable property of another with purpose to benefit  himself or another not entitled thereto.

L.1978, c. 95, s. 2C:20-3, eff. Sept. 1, 1979.

 

[N.J.S. 2C:20-4.]  Theft by deception 
A person is guilty of theft if he purposely obtains property of another by deception.  A person deceives if he purposely:

Creates or reinforces a false impression, including false impressions as  to law, value, intention or other state of mind, and including, but not limited to, a false impression that the person is soliciting or collecting funds for a charitable purpose;  but deception as to a person’s intention to perform a promise shall not be inferred from the fact alone that he did not subsequently perform the promise;

b. Prevents another from acquiring information which would affect his judgment of a transaction;  or

c. Fails to correct a false impression which the deceiver previously created or reinforced, or which the deceiver knows to be influencing another to whom he stands in a fiduciary or confidential relationship.

The term “deceive” does not, however, include falsity as to matters having no pecuniary significance, or puffing or exaggeration by statements unlikely to deceive ordinary persons in the group addressed.

L.1978, c.95; amended 2003, c.43.

 

[N.J.S. 2C:20-5.]  Theft by extortion

A person is guilty of theft by extortion if he purposely and unlawfully obtains property of another by extortion.  A person extorts if he purposely threatens to:

a.  Inflict bodily injury on or physically confine or restrain anyone or commit any other criminal offense;

b.  Accuse anyone of an offense or cause charges of an offense to be instituted against any person;

c.  Expose or publicize any secret or any asserted fact, whether true or false, tending to subject any person to hatred, contempt or ridicule, or to impair his credit or business repute;

d.  Take or withhold action as an official, or cause an official to take or  withhold action;

e.  Bring about or continue a strike, boycott or other collective action, if  the property is not demanded or received for the benefit of the group in whose  interest the actor purports to act;

f.  Testify or provide information or withhold testimony or information with  respect to another’s legal claim or defense;  or

g.  Inflict any other harm which would not substantially benefit the actor but which is calculated to materially harm another person.

It is an affirmative defense to prosecution based on paragraphs b, c, d or f  that the property obtained was honestly claimed as restitution or indemnification for harm done in the circumstances or as lawful compensation for property or services.

L.1978, c. 95, s. 2C:20-5, eff. Sept. 1, 1979.  Amended by L.1979, c. 178, s. 34, eff. Sept. 1, 1979.

[N.J.S. 2C:20-6.]  Theft of property lost, mislaid, or delivered by mistake
A person who comes into control of property of another that he knows to have  been lost, mislaid, or delivered under a mistake as to the nature or amount of  the property or the identity of the recipient is guilty of theft if, knowing  the identity of the owner and with purpose to deprive said owner thereof, he  converts the property to his own use.

L.1978, c. 95, s. 2C:20-6, eff. Sept. 1, 1979.]

 

Fines & Monetary Penalties

In New Jersey, penalties for theft crimes are directly related to the amount allegedly stolen.

Value Stolen Criminal Degree Potential Jail Term
$75,000 or more 2nd Degree Crime Up to 10 years in prison
More than $500 and less than $75,000 3rd Degree Crime Up to 5 years in prison
More than $200 up to $500 4th Degree Crime Up to 18 months in jail
Less than $200 Disorderly Persons Offense Up to 6 months in jail

 

Furthermore, the nature of the property stolen can also increase the potential penalties.  For instance, theft can be a Second Degree crime if the property is taken by extortion, considered a dangerous or controlled substance greater than 1 kilogram, or involves human remains.  Similarly, theft can be a Third Degree crime if the property is a gun, automobile, boat, airplane, pet, taken from the body of the victim (as in from their pocket or hand), taken by threat, social benefits (such as Social Security, TANF, food stamps) or a blank prescription.

What constitutes probable cause to search or arrest?

A case of suspected homicide: A woman is missing. Her husband’s alibi for the time his wife disappeared can’t be corroborated. He admits having a girlfriend. A neighbor calls police to report recent digging in the backyard. When police arrive, the husband is packed and ready to go.

Do police have probable cause to arrest him or to obtain a warrant to search the home?

Probable cause is a reasonable belief, based on facts, that evidence of a particular crime will be found in a particular place to be searched, or that a particular person is responsible for a particular crime — in this case, homicide. “Mere suspicion” is not enough.

The husband’s behavior is merely suspicious. That his alibi can’t be confirmed and that he is involved with another woman do not establish reasonable factual grounds to believe that a crime has been committed, or to link him to it. But the third factor — the backyard digging — is sufficient grounds to get a warrant to search the yard. When the yard is dug up and the missing woman’s body or clothing is found, the hole is evidence of a crime, linked to the husband, and establishes probable cause for his arrest.

If — before the yard was excavated — the neighbor claimed that the day the wife disappeared, she saw the husband carrying a shovel to the backyard, visibility was good, and she sees reasonably well, then the facts show:  1) evidence linking the digging to a crime, and 2) evidence linking the husband to the digging and the crime. Probable cause to search and to arrest would exist even before the yard was excavated. If she’d seen him struggle with the weight of a large bundle or her dog dragged home a scarf belonging to the victim, the showing of probable cause would be even stronger.

The case of the suspected drug dealer: Police go to Bateman’s apartment to question him about a suspected drug deal. When the door opens, they see Bateman drop a marijuana pipe. While standing with him in the doorway, officers see other drug paraphernalia in the living room. An officer detects a strong odor of smoke. Officers ask if anyone else is in the apartment; Bateman says he doesn’t think so. Officers then hear a voice in the kitchen. An officer walks into the kitchen, finds it covered in smoke and soot, and sees a man he recognizes as a convicted drug dealer with an outstanding arrest warrant. After officers enter the apartment, they see a tobacco tin filled with what appears to be marijuana on the living room table.

Do officers have probable cause for a warrant to search the apartment for drugs? Yes. They saw a pipe and other paraphernalia. They smelled, then saw, evidence of cooking but no food, with a known drug dealer in the kitchen. These facts establish a reasonable belief that evidence of drug dealing will be found in the apartment.

Do officers have probable cause to arrest Bateman on the spot? Yes, for possession of marijuana. If possession of drug paraphernalia is illegal in that state, he can be arrested on that charge as well.

A search warrant was obtained and a meth lab found in a closet off the kitchen. Only then did officers have probable cause to arrest Batement for illegal manufacture of drugs.

(Facts adapted from State v. Bateman, 2004 MT 281, 323 Mont. 280, 99 P.3d 656.)