Fall 2010 Municipal Law Review

1. Breath Test Warnings Now Must Be Given in Spanish. State v. Marquez 202 NJ 485
(2010)

In this case involving a conviction o! !eusing to su"#it to a che#ical "!eath test$ the
%ou!t hol&s that New Je!se'(s i#plie& consent law$ N)J)*)+) ,-.4/50)2$ an& !eusal law$
N)J)*)+) ,-.4/50)4a$ !e0ui!e p!oo that an oice! !e0ueste& the #oto!ist to su"#it to a
che#ical "!eath test an& ino!#e& the pe!son o the conse0uences o !eusing to &o so) 1he
state#ent use& to e2plain to #oto!ists the conse0uences o !eusal #ust "e given in a
language the pe!son spea3s o! un&e!stan&s) 4ecause &een&ant 5e!#an Ma!0ue6 was
a&vise& o these conse0uences in 7nglish$ an& the!e is no &ispute that he &i& not un&e!stan&
7nglish$ his !eusal conviction is !eve!se&)
2. DL Suspension on Traffic Ticet !equires Wi""fu" #io"ation. State v. Moran 202 NJ
,11 (2010)

1he license suspension p!ovision o N)J)*)+) ,-.5/,1$ which is pu"lishe& in the Moto!
8ehicle %o&e o the New Je!se' *tatutes +nnotate&$ is not 9hi&&en$: an& &een&ant$ li3e all
#oto!ists$ is p!esu#e& to 3now the law) 1o ensu!e that license suspensions #ete& out
pu!suant to N)J)*)+) ,-.5/,1 a!e i#pose& in a !easona"l' ai! an& unio!# #anne!$ so that
si#ila!l' situate& &een&ants a!e t!eate& si#ila!l'$ the %ou!t to&a' &eines the te!# 9willul
violation: containe& in N)J)*)+) ,-.5/,1 an& enunciates sentencing stan&a!&s to gui&e
#unicipal cou!t an& Law ;ivision <u&ges)
$. %o"ice &ou"' Not Lift (p Shirt for Terr) *ris. State v. %rivott 20, NJ 1= (2010)

4ase& on the totalit' o the ci!cu#stances$ the!e we!e speciic an& pa!ticula!i6e&
!easons o! the oice! to con&uct an investigato!' stop an& to !is3 &een&ant >!ivott)
?oweve!$ the oice!(s con&uct in liting &een&ant(s shi!t e2cee&e& the scope o a !easona"le
int!usion that is pe!#itte& as pa!t o a 1e!!' stop)
+. %rotective Sweep ,fter Gunshot So-eti-es %er-itte' on %rivate %ropert). State v.
Davi"a 20, NJ -@ (2010)
+ p!otective sweep con&ucte& on p!ivate p!ope!t' is not pe! se invali& #e!el' "ecause it
&oes not occu! inci&ent to an a!!est) Law eno!ce#ent oice!s #a' con&uct a p!otective
sweep onl' when (1) the oice!s a!e lawull' within p!ivate p!e#ises o! a legiti#ate pu!pose$
which #a' inclu&e consent to ente!A an& (2) the oice!s on the scene have a !easona"le
a!ticula"le suspicion that the a!ea to "e swept ha!"o!s an in&ivi&ual posing a &ange!) 1he
sweep will "e uphel& onl' i it is (1) con&ucte& 0uic3l'$ an& (2) !est!icte& to a!eas whe!e the
pe!son posing a &ange! coul& hi&e) Bhen an a!!est is not the "asis o! ent!'$ the police #ust
"e a"le to point to &ange!ous ci!cu#stances that &evelope& once the oice!s we!e at the
scene)
.. ,/an'one' Bag %er-its Search. State v. &arva0a" 202 NJ 214 (2010)
1he *tate satisie& its "u!&en o p!oving "' a p!epon&e!ance o the evi&ence that the
&uel "ag was a"an&one&) %a!va<al &enie& having an' owne!ship o! possesso!' inte!est in
1
the "ag$ an& the police atte#pte& to i&enti' othe! potential owne!s) %a!va<al the!eo!e ha& no
stan&ing to challenge the wa!!antless sea!ch o the "ag)
1. 2f not 3nough Breath Supp"ie' on ,"cotest4 5fficer Must !ea' ,''itiona" Warnings.
State v. Sch-i't 414 NJ *upe!) 1-4 (+pp) ;iv) 2010)
In this opinion the cou!t hol& that (1) the police a!e !e0ui!e& to co#pl' with N)J)*)+) ,-.4/
50)2(e) "' !ea&ing the stan&a!& language conce!ning the conse0uences o a !eusal to ta3e
an +lcotest (pa!t two o the *tan&a!& *tate#ent) when a &een&ant une0uivocall' ag!ees to
su"#it to an +lcotest "ut then ails without !easona"le e2cuse to p!o&uce a vali& sa#ple an&
(2) the police have the &isc!etion to &iscontinue the +lcotest an& cha!ge the a!!estee with
!eusal without ao!&ing the a!!estee the #a2i#u# eleven atte#pts that the +lcotest #achine
pe!#its)
6. No More than 178 Da)s 9ai" in a Municipa" &ourt &ase. State v. *e'erico 414 NJ
*upe!) ,21 (+pp) ;iv) 2010)
;een&ant$ convicte& at a "ench t!ial in #unicipal cou!t an& on t!ial &e novo in the Law
;ivision$ #a' not !eceive a custo&ial sentence o #o!e than 180 &a's o! all consoli&ate&
cha!ges &ispose& o in a single p!ocee&ing)
7. No Warrant"ess Search of Truc S"eeper &o-part-ent /ase' on s-e"" of wee'.
State v. %o-pa 414 NJ *upe!) 21- (+pp) ;iv) 2010)

Following his conviction o va!ious &!ug oenses$ &een&ant appeale& the &enial o his
#otion to supp!ess in e2cess o thi!t' poun&s o #a!i<uana sei6e& "' police without a wa!!ant
!o# a closet in the sleepe! ca"in o &een&antCs t!acto! t!aile!) 1he cou!t hel& that the closel'
!egulate& "usiness e2ception pe!#itte& a wa!!antless a&#inist!ative inspection o ce!tain
a!eas o the t!acto!/t!aile!$ "ut conclu&e& that the sea!ch tu!ne& unlawul when it p!og!esse&
into un!egulate& a!eas without the e2igent ci!cu#stances !e0ui!e& "' *tate v) >ena/Flo!es$
1-8 N)J) =$ 28 (200-))
:. No State-ent ,'-issi/"e /) Non;,ppearing Witness. State v. Basi" 202 NJ 5@0
(2010)

1he on/scene i&entiication "' a citi6en ino!#ant an& co!!o"o!ative &iscove!' o the
weapon gave oice!s p!o"a"le cause to a!!est &een&ant an&$ the!eo!e$ &een&ant(s
voluntee!e& state#ent to police shoul& not have "een supp!esse& as the p!o&uct o an
unlawul a!!est) In a&&ition$ the #e#"e!s o the %ou!t "eing e0uall' &ivi&e&$ the <u&g#ent o
the +ppellate ;ivision is ai!#e&$ hol&ing that the non/appea!ing witness(s testi#onial
hea!sa' state#ent was ina&#issi"le un&e! the *i2th +#en&#ent %on!ontation %lause) 1he
a&#ission o the state#ent ha& the clea! capacit' to cause an un<ust !esult an& was not
ha!#less e!!o! "e'on& a !easona"le &ou"t)
18. 2nvestigator) Stop %er-itte' where %o"ice ha' ,rticu"a/"e Suspicion of Drugs. State
v. Mann 20, NJ ,28 (2010)
1he t!ial cou!t ai!l' conclu&e& that the police ha& !easona"le an& a!ticula"le suspicion
2
to suppo!t an investigato!' stop o &een&ant an& that the sei6u!e o &!ugs !o# "oth locations
was lawul)
11. 5nce i-poun'e'4 the po"ice were require' to o/tain a warrant /efore searching the
vehic"e. State v Minitee 415 NJ *upe!) 4@5 (+pp) ;iv) 2010)
In these "ac3/to/"ac3 appeals conce!ning the wa!!antless sea!ch o a #oto! vehicle$
the cou!t ha!#oni6e& the see#ingl' inconsistent hol&ings in *tate v) Ma!tin$ 8@ N)J) 5=1
(1-81) an& *tate v) >ena/Flo!es$ 1-8 N)J) = (200-)$ "' in&ing that the e2igent ci!cu#stances
that e2iste& at the scene onl' pe!#itte& the police to sei6e the vehicle) Dn&e! ou! *tateCs
%onstitution$ once i#poun&e&$ the police we!e !e0ui!e& to o"tain a wa!!ant "eo!e sea!ching
the vehicle)
12. No Suit versus %o"ice Despite ,rrest on Mistaen 2'entification. Ba)er v. Township
of (nion 414 NJ *upe!) 2,8 (+pp) ;iv) 2010)

In this case$ whe!e &een&ant was a!!este& "ase& upon a #ista3en i&entiication$ the
cou!t ai!# the t!ial cou!tCs &is#issal o plaintiCs 42 D)*)%)+) E 1-8, clai# on su##a!'
<u&g#ent "ecause a ca!eul !eview o the un&ispute& acts !eveals that a !easona"le police
oice! woul& have "elieve& the!e was p!o"a"le cause to a!!est plainti) 1hat was a
&ete!#ination app!op!iatel' #a&e "' the t!ial cou!t) Be also ai!# the t!ial cou!tCs &is#issal
o plaintiCs 1o!t %lai#s +ct clai# "ecause plainti aile& to p!ovi&e ti#el' notice pu!suant to
N)J)*)+) 5-.8/8)
7&ito!ial +ssistance p!ovi&e& "' +ssociate 7&ito! Louis Incatasciato$ a secon&/'ea!
stu&ent 4!oo3l'n Law *chool) M!) Incatasciato pa!ticipate& in the Law %le!3 Inte!nship
>!og!a# at the Law Fice o Genneth 8e!ca##en an& +ssociates)
2n'e<
1) Breath Test Warnings Now Must Be Given in Spanish. State v. Marquez
2. DL Suspension on Traffic Ticet !equires Wi""fu" #io"ation. State v. Moran
$. %o"ice &ou"' Not Lift (p Shirt for Terr) *ris. State v. %rivott
+. %rotective Sweep ,fter Gunshot So-eti-es %er-itte' on %rivate %ropert). State
v. Davi"a
.. ,/an'one' Bag %er-its Search. State v. &arva0a"
1. 2f not 3nough Breath Supp"ie' on ,"cotest4 5fficer Must !ea' ,''itiona"
Warnings. State v. Sch-i't
6. No More than 178 Da)s 9ai" with a Municipa" &ourt &ase. State v. *e'erico
7. No Warrant"ess Search of Truc S"eeper &o-part-ent /ase' on s-e"" of wee'.
State v. %o-pa
:. No State-ent ,'-issi/"e /) Non;,ppearing Witness. State v. Basi"
18. 2nvestigating Stop %er-itte' where %o"ice ha' ,rticu"a/"e Suspicion of Drugs.
State v. Mann
3
11. 5nce i-poun'e'4 the po"ice were require' to o/tain a warrant /efore searching the
vehic"e. State v Minitee
12. No Suit versus %o"ice Despite ,rrest on Mistaen 2'entification. Ba)er v. Township
of (nion
2818 M(N2&2%,L &5(!T &5LL3G3
Dece-/er 14 2818 Mon'a)
.=$8 %M to :=88 %M
New 9erse) Law &enter4 New Brunswic
+ gui&e to han&ling #unicipal cou!t #atte!s in 'ou! p!actice)
1his ino!#ation/pac3e& p!og!a# is &esigne& o! atto!ne's who &o not concent!ate in
#unicipal cou!t law$ inclu&ing gene!al p!actitione!s see3ing to e2pan& into this p!actice a!ea
H not$ novice atto!ne's loo3ing to c!eate a niche p!actice) *easone& #unicipal cou!t law'e!s
a!e ce!tainl' #o!e than welco#e to <oin us an& "!ush up on thei! s3ills)
Iou(ll 9go "ac3 to school: to atten& = hal hou! seg#ents an& panel &iscussions that
will p!ovi&e 'ou with a wo!3ing 3nowle&ge o #unicipal cou!t law "asics) Iou(ll 0uic3l' "e a"le
to !ep!esent clients in a wi&e !ange o #atte!s 'ou woul& no!#all' have ha& to !ee! to othe!s)
5ain coni&ence in 'ou! a"ilit' to han&le #unicipal cou!t law #atte!s) Ma3e an invest#ent in
'ou! legal ca!ee! an& !egiste! to&a'J
Gain insight an' infor-ation that wi"" he"p )ou represent c"ients in ever) aspect
of -unicipa" court "aw4 inc"u'ing=K Initial inte!view getting !etaine& an& &ealing with the
p!osecuto!K ;!iving while suspen&e&K ;!ug cases an& ;R7K +ssault an& #iscellaneousK
;BI / 4loo&K ;BI L +lcotest
%rofessors>Speaers inc"u'e...
G7NN71? +) 87R%+MM7N$ 7*M)
>ast %hai!$ NJ*4+ Municipal %ou!t *ection
>ast 5> *olo *ection +tto!ne' o the Iea!
200= NJ*4+ Municipal %ou!t >!actitione! o the Iea!
G) 8e!ca##en H +ssociates (7&ison)
JF?N 7) ?F5+N$ 7*M)
JF?N M7NN7L$ 7*M)
NFRM+ M) MDR5+;F$ 7*M)
%hie >!osecuto! (7li6a"eth)
+ssistant >!osecuto! (Boo&"!i&ge)
Mu!ga&o H %a!!oll$ 7s0) (7li6a"eth)
*17>?7N ;) BILLI+M*$ 7*M)
4
Who shou"' atten'=K Ju&ges H >!osecuto!sK 5ene!al p!actitione!sK %!i#inal law p!actitione!s
K Municipal %ou!t law p!actitione!sK Litigato!sK New atto!ne'sK Me#"e!s o law eno!ce#ent
Includes seminar, 400 page book, CD with over 1,000 pages of forms, dinner, coffee, desert
Tuition ranges between $14! $1"# depending on $%&'( membership Call >hone.
(@,2)214/8500 &eminar ? S:12;21.:+
New 9erse) 2nstitute for &ontinuing Lega" 3'ucation Fne %onstitution *0ua!e$ New
4!unswic3$ New Je!se' 08-01/1520 K Fa2. (@,2)24-/0,8, K %usto#e!*e!viceOn<icle)co#
N9 &L3 2N*5!M,T25N= This program has been approved b) the 'oard on Continuing
*egal +ducation of the &upreme Court of $ew %erse) for ,- hours of total C*+ credit
1he non/p!oit continuing e&ucation se!vice o. The New 9erse) State Bar ,ssociation4
!utgers ; The State (niversit) of New 9erse)s an' Seton @a"" (niversit)
5