If I had a nickel for everyone who comes to the municipal court for driving while suspended in violation of N.J.S.A. 39:3-40 or driving without insurance, I could go on vacation next week. These are probably two of the most serious offenses heard in the municipal court and the two with very strict penalties. For example, driving without insurance required a MANDATORY loss of license. Bravo! The Legislature has amended the penalties:
For the first offense of driving without insurance in violation of 39:6B-2, the penalties are:
By no means am I suggesting that these are not harsh penalties, but you know the old adage: “If money can fix it, it ain’t broke!” What used to happen is that someone would be caught driving without insurance, lose his license, and lose his job because he could not drive to the job, and we all know that there is no bus service to all parts of New Jersey.
While the news should be categorized as “good,” I will note that if you have nine insurance points, you will no longer be eligible to buy insurance on the open market. You will be placed in what we called the assigned risk group and will have to purchase insurance at a higher rate.
For the second and subsequent offenses, needless-to-say, the penalties are stricter:
Remember that failure to produce at the time of trial an insurance identification card or an insurance policy which was in force for the time of operation for which the offense is charged creates a rebuttable presumption that the person was uninsured when charged with the violation. If you are cited by the police for being in violation of this statute, get insurance IMMEDIATELY! More than likely, if you have valid insurance at the time you get to court, the prosecutor will allow you to plead to failure to present a valid insurance credential which is a fine and no point violation.
Good News…
Everyone know that the law requires that if you are not free to leave, the police must advise you that you have the right to remain silent; anything you say can be used against you at trial. You have the right to an attorney during questioning. If you can not afford an attorney, an attorney will be appointed by the court to represent you. These are called the “Miranda Warnings.” The court this year reaffirmed the requirement that police apprise you of your rights, even if you have heard them said a thousand times on “Law and Order” or “Boston Legal” or “Blue Bloods.”
In State v. Hager, the court considered whether the omission of one of the Miranda warnings during the custodial interrogation adequately conveys the substance of the warnings and concluded it did not, even if the defendant continuously interrupted their delivery. The court concluded that the suspect’s interruption of the warnings does not discharge law enforcement of their duty to deliver them. The court found that it was not “harmless error” to give part of the warnings and not all of the warnings causing the court to reverse defendant’s conviction.
All in all, the New Jersey courts and the state legislature has been a mixed bag, but mostly good to New Jersey citizens. Keep reading as I share with you some of the other news from the courts and the legislature in 2020.
