DWI Talk Given at NJ State Bar Association Meeting

I gave a talk last night at the New Jersey State Bar Association, Municipal Court Section meeting in New Brunswick at the NJ Law Center.  The subject of my talk was the ongoing temperature probe issue related to the Alcotest machines in use in every municipality in New Jersey.  As some of you already know my firm has a case, currently at the appellate division, captioned State v. Holland.  In State v. Holland, we sought to suppress our client's Alcotest readings by objecting to the State's unilateral and unsanctioned substitution of the Drager Safety Ertco Hart temperature probe, which has been sanctioned by the New Jersey Supreme Court, with a Control Company temperature probe.  See our previous post

here

on this issue.  

 

What really amazed me about the presentation was that I got the impression that lawyers who do DWi defense work are still not using this as a routine part of their defense.  In addition, I had occasion to speak to a municipal court Judge who sits in Passaic County who said that in the three towns he sits in no one has brought up the issue yet!  This amazes me, as this is such a simple defense which when handled properly, can often get the readings out and reduce a client's sentence from a 7 month suspension to a 3 month suspension.

 

As Jeff Gold, Esq., my co-presenter at the lecture said, this is really a three tiered defense to a DWI with readings.  First, the defense attorney makes the basic argument that the State has failed to provide one of the foundational documents, and therefore the readings should be suppressed.  Failing that, the attorney moves on to stage two of the defense which is to mount a technical defense case and really point out to the judge the technical differences between the two devices and why the Ertco Hart is a superior device.  And, failing that, the defense attorney needs to be prepared to take the case up the ladder on appeal after a full blown trial.  Too many municipal court practitioners are all too willing to just put a plea through when they can be fighting this issue to the end for their client.  Hire a lawyer who is willing to go to the mat for you, it may cost a little extra, but is well worth the results you will achieve.  The lawyers at the Iler Law Firm are willing to go that extra mile for you.

 

Not Guilty in Essex County 2nd Degree Aggravated Assault Trial

On Monday November 8, 2010, we are happy to announce a great success story for one of our clients who stood trial in Essex County on 2nd degree Aggravated Assault charges, as well as Unlawful Possession of a Weapon and Possession of a Weapon for an Unlawful Purpose charges.  

Our client was involved in an altercation and was attacked by a 63 year old man with a pair of hedge clippers.  In defending himself, he sought to ward off the attacker by wielding a PVC pipe, which unfortunately blinded the attacker.  Our client was charged with 2nd degree Aggravated Assault in violation of N.J.S.A 2C:12-1(b)Unlawful Possession of a Weapon in violation of N.J.S.A. 2C:39-5(d) and Possession of a Weapon for an Unlawful Purpose in violation of N.J.S.A. 2C:39-4(d).

After a 5 day jury trial my client was found not guilty an all charges including the lesser included offenses of Aggravated Assault with Significant Bodily Injury in violation of N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1b(7), Simple Assault (N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1a(1) and Simple Assault Mutual Fighting in violation of N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1a(1).

On behalf of my client I was able to mount a successful self defense strategy and the jury reached a unanimous not guilty verdict!  It was nice to see a jury do the right thing and listen carefully to both sides of a story, judge the credibility of witnesses properly and reach a just conclusion.  My best wishes and thoughts go out to my client who is now fully enjoying his freedom for the first time in over a year.