Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 44 of 44

Thread: N.J. top court rules police must explain DWI test laws in native language

  1. #41
    pirate lover
    liblady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    St Thomas, VI
    Last Seen
    03-14-16 @ 03:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    16,165
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: N.J. top court rules police must explain DWI test laws in native language

    Quote Originally Posted by Reverend_Hellh0und View Post
    I live in jersey. "Refusal" carries the same penalties or more and is considered a DUI conviction. You can be charged with both, its usually however one or the other. If he refuses and they throw out the case, as stated in the op, then they can't go back and charge with DUI as there is no evidence of DUI unless he was charged with DUI and had witnesses etc. which is very very rare because the conviction rate is next to nill in that scenario.


    If the article says he was convicted of a DUI, but had a refusal thrown out, it's not accurate or it's missing key information.
    it clearly says the conviction was upheld, rev, and:

    As a result, he was charged with driving while intoxicated and refusing to take a breath test.
    Last edited by liblady; 07-14-10 at 11:29 AM.

    Originally Posted by johnny_rebson:

    These are the same liberals who forgot how Iraq attacked us on 9/11.


  2. #42
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,492

    Re: N.J. top court rules police must explain DWI test laws in native language

    Quote Originally Posted by liblady View Post
    it clearly says the conviction was upheld, rev,



    I see that. knowing NJ though, there is more to this story. I'm telling you, if one gets a refusal it carries the same penalties as a DUI, and one usually does not get convicted or even charged with both.
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  3. #43
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: N.J. top court rules police must explain DWI test laws in native language

    I don't know why there has to be more to the story. He was charged on both counts. Found guilty of both; the higher court upheld the DUI (he admitted to taking Percosets for pain) and threw out the conviction on refusing to take a breathalizer. That makes perfect sense to me if the guy couldn't understand English. He didn't refuse. He just didn't understand.

    In Illinois, I think one would often be charged with both. The conviction/penalty for not taking a breathalizer is completely independent as to whether a person is drunk or not. Automatic six-month suspension for the refusal. Also in Illinois, one certainly does not have to take a breathalizer to be convicted of DUI. The officer's field sobriety tests are enough. No witnesses needed.
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  4. #44
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,492

    Re: N.J. top court rules police must explain DWI test laws in native language

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    I don't know why there has to be more to the story. He was charged on both counts. Found guilty of both; the higher court upheld the DUI (he admitted to taking Percosets for pain) and threw out the conviction on refusing to take a breathalizer. That makes perfect sense to me if the guy couldn't understand English. He didn't refuse. He just didn't understand.

    In Illinois, I think one would often be charged with both. The conviction/penalty for not taking a breathalizer is completely independent as to whether a person is drunk or not. Automatic six-month suspension for the refusal. Also in Illinois, one certainly does not have to take a breathalizer to be convicted of DUI. The officer's field sobriety tests are enough. No witnesses needed.



    I'm just sayin... This dood must have been polluted to get charged with both....
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •