SILENCE DURING DWI STOP IS NOT EVIDENCE OF GUILT

The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled yesterday that silence by a defendant at or near the time of his arrest for DWI cannot be used as evidence of guilt or to impeach the person's credibility at trial.  In both the municipal court and Law Division, the judges had drawn an inference of guilt from the defendant’s silence at the accident scene and ruled that he had allowed operation of his vehicle by an intoxicated person in violation of N.J.S.A. 39:4-50(a). The Supreme Court reversed, holding that a person's federal constitutional and state statutory and common law right to remain silent applies in the context of New Jersey DWI cases and that silence by the defendant "at or near the time of arrest" may not be used to infer guilt or impeach credibility at trial.  After a lengthy discussion of an individual's right to remain silent, the N.J. Supreme Court held it was "undisputed" that until the defendant was questioned and issued a summons, he was not free to leave the scene of the accident.  Thus, Defendant’s silence occurred “at or near” his receipt of a summons at the scene for a violation of N.J.S.A. 39:4-50, the functional equivalent of an arrest.  In the Supreme Court's opinion, the defendant's silence should not have been used for any purpose assess guilt or credibility -- and the Law Division’s reliance on that silence constituted error.  The link to State v. Stas is:  http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/opinions/supreme/A1411StatevManafStas.pdf

For more information, or if you have other legal concerns, email Gavin Handwerker, Esq. at gih@beinlaw.com.