Driving after taking prescription medication and being charged with DWI. 39:4-50
The NJ DWI statute is not only about prohibiting driving after drinking. It also prohibits driving after taking prescription medication which may render someone under the influence. Even if a medical doctor prescribed the medication police can still charge someone with driving under the influence of those medications.
width=32width=1239:4-50width=12. (a) Except as provided in subsection (g) of this section, a person who operates a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, narcotic, hallucinogenic or habit-producing drug, or operates a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.08% or more by weight of alcohol in the defendants blood or permits another person who is under the influence of intoxicating liquor, narcotic, hallucinogenic or habit-producing drug to operate a motor vehicle owned by him or in his custody or control or permits another to operate a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.08% or more by weight of alcohol in the defendants blood shall be subject to penalties.
As used in this section, the phrase narcotic, hallucinogenic or habit-producing drug includes an inhalant or other substance containing a chemical capable of releasing any toxic vapors or fumes for the purpose of inducing a condition of intoxication, such as any glue, cement or any other substance containing one or more of the following chemical compounds: acetone and acetate, amyl nitrite or amyl nitrate or their isomers, benzene, butyl alcohol, butyl nitrite, butyl nitrate or their isomers, ethyl acetate, ethyl alcohol, ethyl nitrite or ethyl nitrate, ethylene dichloride, isobutyl alcohol or isopropyl alcohol, methyl alcohol, methyl ethyl ketone, nitrous oxide, n-propyl alcohol, pentachlorophenol, petroleum ether, propyl nitrite or propyl nitrate or their isomers, toluene, toluol or xylene or any other chemical substance capable of causing a condition of intoxication, inebriation, excitement, stupefaction or the dulling of the brain or nervous system as a result of the inhalation of the fumes or vapors of such chemical substance.
Prosecutors can prosecute someone driving a car after taking legal medications. Often the police obtain a blood test or urine test. The lab report comes back position for medications. Therefore, it is important to hire an attorney who will file the appropriate motions to help defend you.
Pretrial Motions to be filed
1) Suppress Evidence
2) Miranda/Privilege
3) Exclude Lab Tests
4) Discovery
5) Reciprocal Discovery
6) Speedy Trial
7) Notice of Objection to Lab Reports
8) Jury Trial
9) Punishment
10) Vagueness
PPEARANCE AND ARRAIGNMENT WAIVED
PRE‑TRIAL MOTIONS
At a time to be set by the Court, Defendant will move for Orders pursuant to R. 3:10‑5, 3:13‑1, and 7:7-7, as follows and requests oral argument pursuant to R. 1:6‑2(d) to preserve all of defendants rights and defenses:
1) Suppress Evidence. Defendant will move to suppress, evidence obtained by the State during its investigation of case, pursuant to R. 3:5‑7 and 7:5-2, because evidence‑‑ie defendants person, breath, blood, and/or other things‑‑was seized unlawfully, without a warrant and contrary to U.S. Const. Amends. IV and XIV and N.J. Const. Art.1, para.7. Defendant believes the State will use this evidence in proceedings before this Court on the above captioned charges.
2) Miranda/Privilege. Defendant will move to exclude statements by, and evidence obtained from, Defendant during the States investigation of this case because the statements and evidence (a) create substantial danger of undue prejudice to Defendant contrary to Evid.R. 403 (previously Evid.R. 4), (b) are privileged under Evid.R. 503 (previously Evid.R. 25), and (c) were obtained contrary to U.S. Const. Amends. V, VI, IX, and XIV, NJ Constitution 1, paras.1, 10, and 2], and requirements stated in Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US. 486, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966), and its progeny.
3) Exclude Drug Tests. If police used a drug testing instrument in this case, Defendant will move to exclude evidence(‑ of drug test results because (a) the Attorney General failed to exercise administrative authority and prescribe methods and procedures for periodic inspection of drug testing instruments as required by statute, and (b) without such properly prescribed methods and procedures, the State cannot lay the foundation needed for admission of drug test results into evidence at trial.
KENNETH VERCAMMEN & ASSOCIATES, PC
ATTORNEY AT LAW
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
(Phone) 732-572-0500
(Fax) 732-572-0030
website: www.njlaws.com
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.