State v. N. M.

  • Dan T. Matrafajlo
  • Mon Jan 2024
  • 0

State v. N. M. (charged with 39:4-50 (DWI), 39:4-88b (unsafe lane change), 39:4-96 (reckless driving), 39:4-97 (careless driving), 39:4-85 (improper passing).

DWI, unsafe lane change, careless driving, and improper passing were all DISMISSED. Guilty of reckless driving.

On April 8, 2023, a motorist travelling on the Garden State Parkway was stopped by the New Jersey State Police for an unsafe Lane change. As the trooper approached the driver’s side window, the trooper noted a strong odor of an alcoholic beverage emanating from the vehicle. The trooper questioned the driver on where he was coming from and if he had anything to drink before getting into his vehicle. The motorist replied that he had consumed one beer and one shot of BlackBerry brandy. The trooper further noted that the driver’s eyes were watery and bloodshot. Given the observations, the trooper requested the driver step out of his vehicle to perform various field sobriety tests. As the driver was exiting his vehicle, the driver indicated to the investigating trooper that he was suffering from a brain injury.

According to the trooper, the driver could not carry out the requested field sobriety test. Hence, the trooper placed the motorist under arrest for suspicion of driving his vehicle under the influence of alcohol. At the New Jersey State Police Station, the driver submitted to breath-testing, resulting in a 0.14 BAC reading. After 8 months of litigation, The DWI, careless driving, unsafe lane change and improper passing tickets were ALL dismissed. The motorist pled guilty to driving his vehicle recklessly, which resulted in a fine. The court did not impose a loss of driving privileges.

This post is also available in %s.

More Other Case Results

39:4-50

DWI, unsafe lane change, careless driving, and improper passing were all DISMISSED

39:4-98

My client, Matt Pinter, was stopped

N.J. 218

After petitioner pled guilty and served

WL 470640

Dan T. Matrafajlo argued for the plaintiff

129, 137-38

An Appellate Division case that arose out of an appeal of a trial court’s decision granting Defend

  • logos