The consequences of a conviction for drunk (DWI Offense) or refuses to breath test (RefusalOffense) are enormous submit. In addition to personal embarrassment and social stigma with acondemnation of these crimes are connected, the law provides for the sentencing court with awhole constellation of sanctions, including terms of imprisonment, mandatory loss of drivingprivileges for a longer duration and thousands of dollars in financial penalties. The extent ofthese penalties increased almost exponentially beliefs you may have with the number ofprevious DWI offense and whether the offense committed in a school zone. (School ZoneOffense).

The chance of success in any legal action is influenced by a number of important considerationsincluding the possibility of your lawyer, the quality of evidence and the capabilities of yourjudges. One of the most important factors, however, the political and social environment inwhich processed the competition. To truly appreciate the nature and extent of your presentpredicament, it is important that you know about the special environment that affects thesekinds of cases.

Today, 18 million Americans meet the diagnostic criteria for alcohol abuse or alcoholism. Fortypercent of all violent crhymes were of people who were committed under the influence ofalcohol. In 2003, 1.4 million drivers were in this country for alcohol-related offenses, the arrest of1 135 per driver corresponds arrested. Drivers with a blood alcohol content (BAC) above 0.15 ofAmericans see drunk drivers as a threat to themselves and their families. In fact, the Americansare the need for more stringent enforcement of drunk driving laws before health care, poverty,the environment and gun control. As a result, most, if not implemented all States a tough stanceagainst drunk drivers.

The compulsion of political and social factors has produced an extremely hostile attitudetowards people of DWI offenses accused. In one case observed Supreme Court of New Jersey,that the courts in New Jersey works in tandem with the legislators to the obstacles that mayhinder the efficient and remove successful prosecution of drunk drivers. This remarkablestatement clearly connects New Jersey judiciary and its legislature in a common cause,aggressively pursue drunk drivers. This was stated philosophy contradicts basic concepts in ourfederal and state constitutions that contain require the separation of powers of the threebranches of government, to enable a branch to check and balance the other.

There are other considerations, which can seriously hamper your ability to a successfuloutcome in a DWI-related offense to obtain. First, all DWI and refusal to try offenses without ajury. They are of a District Court judge, appointed by the local politicians and is decidedlyfamiliar generally with the police officers. This is important to know, because a jury of citizens ismore inclined to challenge the credibility of an investigating police officers in question, as ajudge of good contacts in the community in which the case may have tried. In my opinion, theconstitutional right to a jury trial, the most sacred of all procedural rights that we have asAmerican citizens. To best characterize my exercise of this right, I refer to a case where theUnited States Supreme Court explained that this organic law of freedom damaged on aconstant concern for or overzealous prosecutors and against the compliant, biased or eccentricjudge ground as as well as a restraint, powers over the life and liberty of the citizens to entrustto a judge or panel of judges. Their inability to present their defense before a jury is of

1 / 3

exceptional concern when, as here, the influences of the current political and socialenvironment seriously affect the outcome of a DWI or refusal Offense.

Secondly, although the federal and state constitutions require the government to go out theburden of proving all elements of the case beyond reasonable doubt of the legislation thatinstructs control a DWI Offense that if your blood alcohol content (BAC) exceeds 0.08%, yoususpects are intoxicated and you have the burden of overcoming this presumption. This isanother case where New Jersey DWI law has another important constitutional guarantee upsidedown. Has been

Thirdly, in an apparent attempt to require a rush to judgment, found that cases of this natureshould be resolved within sixty (60) days after the filing of a complaint, by necessary implication,seriously compromises your ability to create, a thoughtful defense. If, however, willing to try yourcase within this time constraint you are and the government is not the rule somehow loses itscompulsion. In other words, if you seek an adjournment on the eve of this administrative limit,you can not get. If the government does that the same request at this time already, they will begranted as a rule. In fact, 2 or 3 subsequent requests will be met by the municipal prosecutorwith similar success.

Fourth, there is a targeted ban on negotiating plea deals in all DWI or refusal offenses. Althougha plea agreement can be negotiated in a murder case, to beat your ability a bargain that allowsyou to plead anything other than a DWI Offense is virtually nonexistent. The effect of this rule isso that each district court judge, prosecutor or defender who can participate in a pleaarrangement that violates these anti-ethical guidelines plea disciplined.

Finally, if you are convicted of a criminal offense DWI or refusal, you will lose your driver'slicense; no exceptions. There is no provisional or emergency licenses in New Jersey availablethat a DWI offense in connection with which you can apply to drive to or from work or school.

1. The Government of the difficulty of proving a case doubt is best typified the OJ Simpson trial.

Copyright (c) 2008 Frank Luciano

About The Author

Frank T. Luciano, P.C.147 Main Street, Suite 5Lodi, NJ 07644(973) 471-0004ftluciano@aol.comhttp://www.ftlucianolaw.com

2 / 3

Drunk Driving Penalties by regions

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

3 / 3