New Jersey Criminal Defense Blog

An investigator appointed by the New Jersey Supreme Court believes a new breath-testing device for DWI cases is reliable, reports the Associated Press.

Retired Judge Michael Patrick King was appointed to investigate Alcotest’s accuracy after lawsuits brought by 18 DWI defendants claimed the device hadn’t been tested properly. King looked into the accuracy of both the device itself and its software, concluding that it’s far superior to the Breathalyzer that many police agencies now use. The New Jersey Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments on the device in January; more than 10,000 DWI cases hinge on the results. Seventeen of our state’s 21 counties already use Alcotest, but the others are waiting to make the switch until the court’s decision.

As New Jersey DWI defense attorneys, we can tell you that it’s not hard to make a device that’s better than the Breathalyzer. The Breathalyzer was invented in 1954, making it older than many DWI defendants. Its breath-testing function has been criticized for leading to false positives because of interference from mouth alcohol, prescription medications, operator error and many other factors. Because Alcotest also relies on breath testing, we can expect many of the same problems. Much worse, however, are the serious problems a court-appointed software testing firm found with the device’s software. In short, Base One Technologies found the software was so poorly tested that it doesn’t meet federal government standards; the FAA would not be legally permitted to use it for alcohol-testing of commercial pilots.

Continue reading "Alcotest Not Much Improvement Over Breathalyzer" »

Posted by Lependorf & Silverstein | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Legal Information

Bookmark:

New Jersey is buzzing this week about the state legislature’s vote on whether to ban capital punishment. The state Senate has already voted in favor of the ban; the Assembly and Gov. Corzine are expected to follow suit. They’re following a national trend: The U.S. Supreme Court, several state Supreme Courts and a few governors have suspended executions by lethal injection (or in some cases, all executions) pending the outcome of a case challenging the legality of lethal injections. In response, the Associated Press published an interesting article today breaking down changes our nation could expect if we had no death penalty, and arguments for and against it.

As we’ve said before on the New Jersey Criminal Defense Blog, we believe the legislature is right to end the death penalty. The Associated Press article notes that there are emotional and financial arguments around the death penalty. It’s undisputed that it costs more to kill a person than to incarcerate him or her for life; many studies also show that the penalty doesn’t deter future crimes. Furthermore, we believe the death penalty is a form of revenge that has no place in a civilized society. The United States is the only wealthy Western nation that continues to use it.

But as New Jersey criminal defense attorneys, we at Lependorf & Silverstein also see a practical argument: Not everyone who is charged with or convicted of a crime is guilty. Everyone makes mistakes, including law enforcement, prosecutors, judges and juries. Capital punishment makes those mistakes irreversible. The Innocence Project, a multistate effort to exonerate prisoners using DNA evidence, says 208 people have been exonerated with DNA since 1989. Fifteen of those were death row inmates who could have been put to death for crimes they didn’t commit. At Lependorf & Silverstein, we’re proud that our state has taken a leadership role in preventing more such tragedies.

Posted by Lependorf & Silverstein | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Legal Information

Bookmark:

A parking enforcement officer from Bayonne was criminally charged on Dec. 7 when her job interfered with police detectives’ job, reports the Jersey Journal.

Two police detectives were staking out a narcotics suspect in an unmarked car parked at a meter when the officer, Susan Wojtkowski, began writing them a ticket. They opened the window and explained that they were police officers, sparking an argument. While they talked, the suspect left the area. The detectives wanted to follow, but Wojtkowski refused to move away from the car until she had finished writing their ticket. Later that day, she was charged with obstructing a governmental function, which can be handled as either a criminal charge or as a minor infraction -- like a parking ticket.

The Journal couldn’t reach Wojtkowski for comment, but it’s easy to see how this could be a misunderstanding gone wrong. After all, the detectives were working undercover, in an unmarked car. It’s possible that Wojtkowski simply thought they were lying about their job in order to avoid a parking ticket. If that’s the case, she may be guilty of nothing more than doing a thorough job. Under those circumstances, it would be a shame for her to face criminal charges and the possibility of damage to her career, her family and her finances.

At Lependorf & Silverstein, we know how much is at stake for people who have been charged with a crime in New Jersey. Even seemingly minor charges like resisting arrest can result in jail time, steep fines and a felony criminal record. That’s why we always recommend that people accused of a crime consider hiring an experienced New Jersey criminal defense lawyer to help them protect their rights, their freedom and their futures. If you’re facing criminal charges stemming from obstructing police officers, resisting arrest or other New Jersey criminal charges, contact Lependorf & Silverstein today for a free consultation.

Posted by Lependorf & Silverstein | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Criminal Defense

Bookmark:

Police arrested Municipal Court Judge George Korpita Jr, recently in Roxbury on charges of drunk driving. According to an online article that appears on the Star-Ledger’s Web site , Korpita, 47, a resident of Lake Hopatcong, was in the Ledgewood section of Roxbury Township, driving in a black Chrysler sedan on Route 46 West, when authorities stopped him.

Police were responding to an earlier report of a car that would not move past a traffic intersection in the township, though the lights had changed many times, when they located the matching sedan being driven by the Judge. Korpita, who has jurisdiction over Victory Gardens, Dover and Rockaway Borough, was then arrested and charged for driving while being impaired and also for careless driving, the article stated.

This case adds to the list of legal issues that Korpita is facing. Earlier, in August, a Dover securities broker, Warren Hartzman, filed a federal lawsuit against Korpita for $5 million. The lawsuit alleges the judge had abused his power and had Hartzman wrongfully imprisoned over a May incident that occurred in the Cafe Navona restaurant’s parking lot. The dispute happened when Hartzman reportedly scratched Korpita’s Maserati sports car by leaning against it.

To name some of the things first on the line when one is accused of a DUI, are career, family, the license to drive and the expenses involved. Korpita’s case is a classic example of how no one is above the law and how a public official is affected by such an arrest. There is no doubt his credibility, standing and reputation are at stake.

With so much at stake, the decision of choosing an experienced attorney who’ll help fight your DUI charge becomes significant. At Lependorf & Silverstein, we realize dangerous drunk drivers must be kept off the road. But we also know from experience many of the drivers stopped for DUI are wrongfully arrested by police officers, based on flawed science and largely subjective decisions. We will sift through all the evidence, conduct our own investigation and secure the best result for you. Call us now for a free consultation.

Posted by Lependorf & Silverstein | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: DUI DWI Drunk Driving

Bookmark: