Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State of New Jersey v. Julian Rey-Arango

October 26, 2012

STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
JULIAN REY-ARANGO, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.



On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Union County, Municipal Appeal No. 5988.

Per curiam.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Argued October 11, 2012

Before Judges Sapp-Peterson and Haas.

Defendant Julian Rey-Arango was convicted in the Elizabeth Municipal Court of driving while intoxicated (DWI), N.J.S.A. 39:4-50. Following a trial de novo in the Law Division, he was again found guilty. As a first offender under N.J.S.A. 39:4-50(a)(1)(ii), defendant was sentenced to participate for twelve hours in the Intoxicated Driver Resource Program and his driving privileges were suspended for seven months. He was also required to pay mandatory fines and penalties.

On appeal, defendant raises the following contentions:

Point I.

THE FINDINGS OF THE LAW DIVISION COULD NOT HAVE BEEN REASONABLY REACHED AS THERE WAS INSUFFICIENT CREDIBLE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE CONVICTION.

Point IIA.

THE FINDINGS OF THE LAW DIVISION COULD NOT HAVE BEEN REASONABLY REACHED AS THERE WAS INSUFFICIENT CREDIBLE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE CONVICTION BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT ON THE POLICE OFFICER(S) OBSERVATIONS.

Point IIB.

THE FINDINGS OF THE LAW DIVISION COULD NOT HAVE BEEN REASONABLY REACHED AS THERE WAS INSUFFICIENT CREDIBLE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE CONVICTION THROUGH THE USE OF THE ALCOTEST DEVICE AND THE SENTENCE OF 12 MONTHS SUSPENSION IS THEREFORE ILLEGAL. Point IIC.

THE FINDING OF GUILTY OF THE DEFENDANT AND THE ILLEGAL SENTENCE OF 12 MONTHS SUSPENSION EXPOSED DEFENDANT TO DOUBLE JEOPARDY AND DUE PROCESS VIOLATION.

Point III.

THE LAW DIVISION ERRED IN FINDING THE DEFENDANT GUILTY OF VIOLATING N.J.S.A. 39:4-50, BECAUSE THE STATE FAILED TO PROVE THE PER SE VIOLATION ACCORDING TO THE MANDATES OF STATE V. CHUN.

Point III.(1).

Failure to admit the foundational documents. Point III.(2).

Failure to prove the officers had probable cause and a basis for defendant's arrest was lacking.

Point III.(3).

Failure to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the officers observed the defendant for deprivation ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.