Iler Law Firm wins historic Municipal Appeal for DWI client
The Iler Law Firm made history last week at the Monmouth County Superior Court in Freehold, New Jersey. In State v. Holland, Alexander M. Iler successfully argued a Motion to Suppress the breath test readings based on the use of a substitute temperature probe rather than the temperature probe that was required in the landmark State v. Chun decision.
This case was on appeal from the Neptune City Municipal Court. After the trial judge's denial of our Motion to Suppress the Alcotest breath readings at the Municipal level, our office filed a municipal appeal which was heard at the Monmouth County Superior Court in Freehold. Essentially, our office argued that the breath test readings used in Ms. Holland's case were unreliable because the State used a temperature probe which was manufactured by "Control Company" rather than a temperature probe that was manufactured by "Ertco Hart", the manufacturer that was recognized and approved by the New Jersey Supreme Court in State v. Chun. However, now the State uses a different temperature probe because it is cheaper but the reliability of this substitute temperature probe has never been examined and there has never been any scientific testimony regarding same. Mr. Iler succesfully argued that the breath test readings were unreliable and should be suppressed. The case now goes back to the municipal court with no breath test readings and the future holds either a not guilty or reduced penalties for our client.
Judge Richard W. English, J.S.C. heard the Municipal Appeal on Friday April 16, 2010 and ruled in our favor. Judge English stated on the record that the breath results are not reliable because there has been no scientific testimony whatsoever as to the reliability of the Control Company temperature probe as opposed to the Ertco Hart temperature probe which was examined and approved in State v. Chun. Based on this decision, all breath test readings in which this substitute temperature probe was used are now suspect in Monmouth County and the readings should be suppressed. This is an important decision for drunk driving law throughout New Jersey and is a historic victory for the law firm and for our client.
Now that the decision is made that substitute temperature probes and unreliable and breath teasts useing that probe are not allowed in Moumouth county is that also going to be the case for other countys in New Jersey such as Camden County.
- we can only hope so. There are several different competing decisions out of different counties. I am unaware of a superior court decision regarding this issue out of Camden. As the issue now stands, we are having comparability and reliability hearings starting may 25, 2011 before judge France's vernoia in the Monmouth county superior court related to the ertco-hart device versus the control company device. Should be interesting! -Alexander M. Iler
Do we have a decision on this hearing yet?
-Response-
The Holland hearings took place before the Honorable Frances J. Vernoia in the Monmouth County Superior Court. The hearings spanned May 25, 26 and 27th. Defense briefs were submitted to Judge Vernoia on Friday, June 17, 2011. We now await Judge Vernoia's findings of fact and conclusions of law, which will then be submitted to the appellate division for their final opinion. So, what that practically means is that we could be waiting for a decision until sometime in September or October, or even later. My feeling is that the state failed to meet it's burden of proof. If the Appellate Division will let us win, is another question!