Attention DUI (drunk driving) defendants who lost your case at trial…
Feb 21st, 2008 | By Michael L. Saile, Jr., Esq. | Category: Blogs, DUI-DWI-DAI (Drunk Driving)Yesterday, the United States Supreme Court established new law regarding the confrontation clause of the United States Constitution. This is an expansion of the Crawford case handed down in 2004.
The High Court ruled that the Crawford (right to confront a witness) issue may be able to be applied retroactively. This is particularly important in drunk driving cases. Many states including New Jersey would admit into evidence the report or affidavit from a scientist or doctor who drew or tested the blood of a defendant suspected of drunk driving. Now under the new (semi-new) Crawford doctrine, a defendant has the right to “confront” or cross-examine these doctors or scientists or others as the case may be.
This new case from the U.S. Supreme Court states that the “right to confront” may be applied retroactively, and it is up to the individual states to decide if they will permit retroactive application. This would come in the form of a Post-Conviction Relief Petition.
If NJ applies this rule retroactively, it may only be available for people who actually asserted the right to confront or at least had a trial. This is yet to be determined by NJ courts. We will keep you posted.
See Danforth v. Minnesota here: Danforth v. Minnesota.pdf
The author of this Law Blog, Bucks County PA & Mercer County, NJ criminal attorney, Michael L. Saile, Jr., Esq. of Saile & Saile LLP, Attorneys-at-Law practices both New Jersey and Pennsylvania criminal, traffic violations, and DUI/DWI/DAI law. Check out our website for DUI penalties. We handle all NJ Municipal Court cases including DUI in the following NJ Municipal Courts: Hopewell Township, Ewing Township, Trenton, Lawrence Township, Hamilton, Pennington, and other Mercer County, Burlington County, and Camden County, NJ courts. We also handle lower bucks county DUI and traffic violation cases in the following towns: Bensalem, Southampton, Richboro, Newtown, Levittown, Langhorne, Doylestown, Warminster, Trevose, Feasterville, Warrington, Bristol, Fallsington, Yardley, New Hope, Holland, Washington Crossing, PA, and other Bucks County courts. We handle DUI cases in Philadelphia, Bucks, Chester, Delaware, and Montgomery County, PA. We are located just outside of Philadelphia in lower Bucks County.
Well, I do not see how the NJ Courts can go against the US Supreme Court.
And , I dont think it is only blood related, now defenses can call anyone who signed a calibration of standard solution or instrument into court to testify.
The NJ Supreme Court asked mr levow how many of these people he would call per case, he answered 6.
The NJ Supreme Court said if all 6 people were called into every dui case to testify, they could never trial any cases in municipal court, the backlog would be years and years…. and now taking into account an already 25,000 dui backlog for at least reliability hearings, though in retroactive defeandantys, and new defendants… there would be no way the nj courts could abide by the us supreme court decision.
this is going to lead to more deals and more of the good ole boy networks among the spectrum of the legal prtofession, and leave defendants thrown under the train.
i think this crawford ruiling yesterday is going to force defense lawyers, prosecutors, and judges, to really pout their heads together to figure out case by case how they can sucessfully take away a defendants right to this, and do it 100 percent of the time.
its a bad day for defendants with this new ruling,,, even though on the face of it it looks to be a great thing.
see, the us supreme courts have now given defendants more rights…… and the entire legal system is going to break its back taking the rights away from every angel… which makes me angry and sad….
think about it for a minute, no defendant wants to be convicted of dui, so a not guilty plea is put in nearly 100 percent of the time.
furthermore, as mr reisig told the nj supreme court in his opening lines on april 5, 2005, no court will have a dui trial where a defendant is pro se.
therefore, if defense attoprneys are doing a legitimate job for thjeior clients, every state employes who signed a scientific document relating to any aspect of the alcotest, can and should be called into court totesify.
no, do you see the problem…. i can not even get a trial when the number is not able to be questioned…. the court has no time to trial me based on obsevations, entering the bac as evidence but not challngable by defense…..
how are the local courts ever going ever handle all the trials in the over 500 municpal courts in nj, once chun is decided, where the same 6 state employeess are going to be called in to trsify in every case.
it is an impossible situation, and now appealable to the us supreme court under this new ruling, and frawford, if coyurts refuse to allow it in nj.
i think this ruling by the us supreme court has held up the nj supreme courts opinion in chun.
well, seems the nj supreme court shot that down for the alcotest dui.
however, we can ask the officer questions.
i guiess, theoreticaly, you can read the 80,000 pages in chun and then ask the officer, and when he doesnt know the answers, i guess that could raise doubt, lol.
Anyone have an idea how Crawford confrontation might be applied in quasi-criminal civil matters being heard in the Office of Administrative Law (OAL)… the opponent is DYFS. Thanks! greg
hey, great Site! Its very helpful
http://coloradocaraccidentlawyers.blogspot.com/
Here’s a fantastic site for anyone looking for car accident lawyers.
-get the money & the justice you deserve!