(732) 741-4448 | Info@WolfLawNJ.com
DUI/DWI & Breath Test Refusal Defense Lawyers
Protect Your Rights
DUI & DWI in New Jersey
If you have been arrested for DUI/DWI in the State of New Jersey, you should immediately contact a defense attorney who focuses in this area of law. New Jersey has strict laws and penalties regarding operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs (even if they are Lawfully Prescribed Medications). There are no “hardship” licenses in New Jersey even for the limited purpose of driving to and from work. This is a complex area of law, which is why you need to find an attorney who has extensive experience representing clients charged with DWI.
New Jersey DWI law is governed by N.J.S.A. 39:4-50. Under that statute, a person can be convicted of DWI in two ways in New Jersey. The first is by operating a vehicle under the influence of alcohol. In such a case, the State must prove that you consumed alcohol to the point where your ability to safely operate a motor vehicle was impaired. To prove this, the State will usually rely on your performance on the Standard Field Sobriety Tests (SFSTs). The second way an individual can be convicted of DW is by operating a motor vehicle with a Blood Alcohol Content (BAC) that exceeds the State limit of 0.08%. The State must introduce Alcotest Results or Blood Test Results that exceed the 0.08% limit.
New Jersey DUI law is also governed by N.J.S.A. 39:4-50. You can be convicted of Operating a Motor Vehicle under the Influence of Drugs based upon a combination of the Police Officer’s testimony as to your driving, his or her observations of you, the results of blood or urine testing, and the examination of a Drug Recognition Expert (DRE).
Further, if you refuse to take a chemical breath test (Alcotest) when legally required to do so by law enforcement, you will be charged with Refusal under N.J.S.A. 39:4-50.4 and/or 39:4-50.2. This is because when you receive your driver’s license in New Jersey, you give your Implied Consent to submit to chemical tests. In addition to being charged with refusing to submit, you may still be charged with driving under the influence, and it is possible to be convicted of both offenses and receive double penalties.
During your first telephone call or in-office consultation with Randolph Wolf or Amanda Wolf, we will listen carefully to you in order to determine the facts of your case. We will then explain to you how the laws of New Jersey apply to your situation. Upon hiring our firm, we will write to the Municipal Prosecutor and obtain the complete police department file on your case. We will examine the Constitutional validity of the motor vehicle stop and determine if it can be challenged.
If you are charged with Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol and there is an Alcotest we will obtain the technical documentation of your actual test, the calibration certifications and repair records of the machine, the computer data downloads from the cloud maintained by the New Jersey State Police, and if necessary have them reviewed by an Expert who is a former Lieutenant in charge of the New Jersey State Police Alcohol and Drug Testing Unit, or a former New Jersey State Police Breath Test Coordinator. We will challenge where appropriate the validity of the tests and the readings.
If you are charged with Driving Under the Influence of a Drug or Under the Influence of Alcohol as a result of a blood or urine test, we will obtain all documentation concerning the Consent or Warrant for the blood draw, review the chain of custody of the blood or urine sample from the police department to the laboratory, and the laboratory test results. We will utilize all available defenses to challenge the admissibility of the sample. If you were examined by a Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) we will obtain the report and have its results reviewed and if appropriate challenged by an Expert who is Certified as a Drug Recognition Expert Instructor.
Randolph Wolf and Amanda Wolf will aggressively pursue every approach to defend you against these charges and to have you found Not Guilty or to minimize the penalties.
DUI/DWI and Refusal Penalties
Penalties differ depending on whether the charge is a First Offense, a Second Offense, a Third Offense, or Refusing to Submit to a Breath Test as well as the level of BAC the individual is charged with having at the time of the arrest. Penalties also vary for Underage DWI/DUI, and there are enhanced penalties for those drivers that possess a Commercial Drivers License (CDL).
How Wolf Law Can Help
The attorneys at Wolf Law have been representing people charged with these offenses for over 36 years and have handled literally thousands of cases. We not only know the law, but also how the system works, and we can use that knowledge and experience to help protect your rights and fight for you to achieve the best possible outcome.
We can help you by looking for flaws and mistakes in the state’s case against you. This includes looking at the reasons the police pulled you over in the first place. In order for a traffic stop to be valid, the police must be able to show that you broke a traffic law or that they had a probable cause to believe that you had committed a crime. We can help determine if the traffic stop was valid or whether it was Unconstitutional. If the stop was not valid, all evidence against you would be inadmissible at trial.
Additionally, we will look for any errors that the police made while conducting tests to determine if you were impaired. These tests can include field sobriety tests, Alcotests, and blood or urine sample laboratory results. At your request, we will have an expert who is a former New Jersey State Police Breath Test Coordinator review the testing in your case to verify that the testing was performed properly and according to the state’s guidelines and that the testing equipment used was properly calibrated to prevent inaccurate and false readings. We will also review other circumstances regarding your arrest, such as potential challenges to any admissions you made by making sure you have been read your Miranda rights and that police respected those rights.
If you are charged with Refusal to Provide a Breath Sample, we will review with you the possible defenses including lack of probable cause for either the stop or to place you under arrest for DWI, and whether you were read and understood the Division of Motor Vehicles Standard Statement (N.J.S.A. 39:4-50.2(e) and whether English is your primary language.
If you attempted to give a breath sample but the machine did not accept it, we will examine the operation of the Alcotest through the Alcohol Influence Report (AIR) that it generates and through the Computer Data Downloads uploaded to the State Police Computer to see if the Refusal was in fact caused by a machine malfunction.
Wolf Law will aggressively pursue every approach to defend you against the DUI/DWI and/or Refusal. We will seek to have you found Not Guilty or to minimize the penalties you receive and will fight to obtain the best possible result.
Frequently Asked Questions
Results
Municipal Court: Officer observed a motor vehicle going approximately 70 mph in a 55 mph zone and tailgating the vehicle in front of him. The Officer initiated a motor vehicle stop, and immediately smelled alcohol on the Client’s breath. The Client was uncooperative with the Officer and refused to do the Stand Field Sobriety Tests and based on his operation of the motor vehicle and the smell of alcohol was placed under arrest. Once they arrived at the police station the Client refused to submit to the breath test. Client was charged with 39:4-50 Driving while Intoxicated; 39:4-50.4A Refusal to Submit to a Breath Test; 39:4-88b, Failure to Maintain Lane; 39:4-126 Failure to Use Turn Signal, a two point ticket; 39:4-89 Tailgating, a five point ticket. Result: The Attorney’s investigation revealed that with respect to the charge of 39:4-50.4A, Refusal, the required NJ Attorney General’s implied consent form was not properly executed. It requires that a second paragraph be read if the defendant’s initial response to a request to take a breath test is “no.” That second paragraph was not read to the Client. Further, because there was no alcotest reading or field sobriety tests conducted, the State was unable to prove the DWI beyond a reasonable doubt. Based on the deficiencies in the case, both the DWI and the Refusal Charges were dismissed. The charge of 39:4-126 was amended to 39:4-96 Reckless Driving and the Client pled guilty to the amended charge with a $239.00 fine and a 60-day loss of license. He also pled guilty to 39:4-88b, Failure to Maintain Lane. All other motor vehicle summonses were dismissed.
Municipal Court: An officer observed Client fail to maintain his lane, crossing the over the center line, and a motor vehicle stop was initiated. The officer immediately smelled alcohol upon approaching the vehicle. Client was asked to do the Standard Field Sobriety Tests and was unable to successfully complete them. He was charged with 39:4-50 Driving While Intoxicated and 39:4-97 Careless Driving, a two point ticket. Client had a BAC of a .09%, and was facing a 3 month loss of his driving privileges, 12 hours in the Intoxicated Driver Resource Center, and fines and penalties of approximately $700.00. Result: The State is required to provide all discovery, including police reports and video recordings, in a timely manner. If they fail to do so, the defendant can file what is called a Hollup Motion, which requires the State to turn over discovery by a certain date or it can be barred from introduction at the time of trial. While the State confirmed that there was a Motor Vehicle Recording of the stop, they failed to provide it despite repeated requests. The Attorneys filed the appropriate motion, obtained a Hollup Order, and the State still failed to supply the video which could have resulted in any statements or observations that would have appeared on the video being suppressed at trial. The Prosecutor therefore agreed to dismiss the DWI, and the Client pled guilty to 39:4-97 Careless Driving, with a forty-five day loss of her driving privileges. He paid $239.00 in fines and penalties. All other motor vehicle tickets, including 39:4-50 DWI were dismissed.
Municipal Court: Dispatch put out a description of a possibly intoxicated driver and gave description of vehicle. When the officer located the matching vehicle, the rear passenger tire was up on the curb. Client said she had lunch at a bar and was on her way home. She was unable to successfully complete the Standard Field Sobriety Tests. She told the Officer that she had a medical condition that made her unable to complete the tests. Client was charged with N.J.S.A. 39:4-50 Driving while Intoxicated and N.J.S.A. 39:4-96 Reckless Driving, a five-point ticket. Since the client had a reading of a .20% BAC, she was facing a 7-to-12-month loss of her driving privileges, 12 hour in the Intoxicated Driver Resource Center (an alcohol education and evaluation program), and a mandatory interlock device for a minimum of six (6) months. Result: An expert was retained to review the operation of the Alcotest Machine, as it appeared there might be an issue when the attorneys reviewed the Alcohol Influence Report The alcotest expert determined that the machine may not have been functioning properly. Further, the information entered into the Alcohol Influence Report was inputted incorrectly by the arresting officer. Based upon all this information, the prosecutor agreed that the breath test results were not admissible. Therefore, the Client pled guilty 39:4-50 DWI with no reading and was sentenced to a 90-day loss of license and 12 hours in the Intoxicated Drivers Resource Center along with $689.00 in fines and penalties. All other tickets were dismissed as part of the plea.
Municipal Court: Client was on her way to the bank when she was involved in a motor vehicle accident. Instead of waiting for the police to come, she instead went into the bank. When the police responded to the scene and spoke to the Client they smelled the odor of alcohol. Client had indicated to Officers prior to beginning the Standard Field Sobriety Tests (SFST) that she had problems with her feet. She was unable to successfully complete the SFST and was placed under arrest and taken to the police station where she submitted to an Alcotest resulting in a reading of .20% BAC. She was charged with 39:4-50 Driving while Intoxicated; 39:4-50(g) Driving While Intoxicated in a School Zone, which doubles all fines and penalties; 39:4-96 Reckless Driving, a five point ticket; 39:4-97 Careless Driving, a two point ticket; 39:4-127 Improper Backing or Turning on a Street, a two point ticket; 39:4-129 Leaving the Scene of an Accident, a mandatory 1 year loss of license; and 39:4-130 Failure to Report an Accident. This would be a second offense DWI for the Client, so she was facing a four-year loss of license and 48 hours in the Intoxicated Driver Resource Center. Result: Based upon the fact that the client merely went into a bank in the same parking lot as the accident, the Leaving the Scene was dismissed. Because her prior DWI was more then 10 years before this one, we obtained a step-down to a first offense DWI to which the client pled guilty with $689.00 fines, 7 months loss, 48 hours IDRC, 6-month interlock. The School Zone charge was dismissed 39:4-50(g)(1 as were the 4-96, 4-97, 4-127, 4-129B, 4-130.
Municipal Court: Officer observed Client driving through a red light and driving on the wrong side of the road. The Officer then initiated the motor vehicle stop, approached the Client’s vehicle, and upon smelling alcohol coming from the passenger cabin, asked the Client to exit the vehicle. As the Client exited his vehicle he stumbled and almost fell over. He was asked to do the Standard Field Sobriety Tests and was unable to successfully complete them. After being taken to the police station, an Alcotest was administered resulting in a BAC of .17%. He was charged with 39:4-50 Driving While Intoxicated, 39:4-96 Reckless Driving, and 39:4-97 Careless Driving. This was a second offense for the Client, however since it had been over ten years since his first DWI, for purposes of sentencing he was entitled to be treated as a first offender with a seven-to-twelve-month loss of his driving privileges, a mandatory interlock device for a minimum of six months, and 12 hours in the Intoxicated Driver Resource Center. Result: The Attorney obtained an expert on the Alcotest who found issues with the instructions given on the field sobriety tests and the operation of the Alcotest machine. The State refused to permit a plea to a lower tier DWI that would have resulted in only a 90-day loss of license and the matter was set down for trial. On the day of trial with the expert in court, the State finally conceded that the Alcotest results would be inadmissible and as a result the Client pled guilty to a lower tier DWI 39:4-50 with no Alcotest reading. He was sentenced to a 90-day loss of his driving privileges, 12 hours in the Intoxicated Driver Resource Center, and $689.00 in fines and penalties.
*While all of these results were actually obtained by Wolf Law in the Municipal Courts and Superior Courts of the State of New Jersey, the success in these cases does not guarantee a similar success in any future case. Client names have been removed to protect their privacy.
50+ Years of Accumulated Practice
How Wolf Law Can Help
With decades of experience handling DUI and DWI cases in New Jersey, Wolf Law PC provides strategic, personalized defense to help minimize penalties and protect your driving record.
We handle a full range of DUI-related matters, including:
-
Boating under the influence
-
Breath test refusal
-
DUI/DWI defense for out-of-state drivers
-
DWI penalties in New Jersey
-
Prescription medication DUI/DWI
-
Underage DUI/DWI