Our DWI Credentials are Exceptional, 7 DWI Defense Lawyers
Our work has been featured in
The Star Ledger
CNBC
LAW & ORDER
Asbury Park Press
ABC
House M.D.
USA Today

Many of our clients and potential clients express concern about a police officer’s justification for making a drunk driving stop. And rightly so, since portions of both the U.S. Constitution and that of the State of New Jersey have been written with the intent of protecting individuals from, among other things, unreasonable motor vehicle stops. As professional trial attorneys, we are dedicated to fighting for our clients’ rights and we know that the law does not allow the police to stop someone, nor subject them to a detention from free movement, unless the police have a legitimate reason for doing so.

When it comes to the reason for making a legitimate traffic stop that may or may not result in a DWI or drug DUI arrest, the law requires that a police office must have an “articulable and reasonable suspicion” that the subject, or driver in this case, has violated some article of the law. The standard that can be applied to this kind of a proper traffic stop may include first-hand observation of a motorist’s driving behavior, or it can be based on information phoned in or otherwise communicated to the police by a third party(s), such as information provided by other law enforcement entities in the way of motor vehicle look-up info, radio transmissions from roving patrols to be on the lookout for a certain vehicle, etc.

Sometimes we are asked if an anonymous tip from another driver or pedestrian is sufficient evidence on which to base a legal traffic stop. In short, an anonymous source can only be used if it is reliable or based on something that can only be established through corroboration of facts. What this means, typically, is that the officer must confirm certain facts alleged by the tipster before effecting the traffic stop. (Note that the only exception to this requirement is where the community caretaker function or a valid roadblock apply.)

With an articulable and reasonable suspicion that a violation of the law has taken place on the roadway, a municipal patrolman or state trooper is then free to make a proper motor vehicle stop. Many times, these incidents may be the result of an observed traffic offense, such as speeding, improper passing, failure to yield at a traffic light, failing to signal a lane change or turn, or any number of other infractions that a police office is able to see happen.

In some cases, a physical problem with the subject’s automobile, truck or motorcycle may result in a routine traffic stop if the problem is in violation of the state’s traffic laws. Inoperative headlamps, taillights, license plate light or signal lamps may trigger a police stop. Similarly, defective vehicle mechanical items that could affect the safety of the occupants of the subject’s vehicle, other motorists and passengers sharing the road, or pedestrians near the roadway on which the subject’s vehicle is traveling may also provide a valid reason for a stop.
Continue reading

In Atlantic, Ocean, Monmouth, Middlesex, Passaic, and Morris County, not to mention the dozen-plus other counties around the Garden State, it is not appropriate to operate a motor vehicle while legally intoxicated as provided in the New Jersey legal statutes. If you or someone you know have been arrested and charged with driving while intoxicated (DWI) or driving under the influence of prescription drugs (drug DUI), you may have already started searching for a drunk driving defense attorney who may be able to assist in your defense.

One of the more important things to remember if ever you find yourself named in a DWI or DUI case is that New Jersey prosecutors, in general, are taught that confronting a defendant in court will be typically more difficult if that individual has retained a DWI lawyer to assist him or her against the state’s accusations. Being found not guilty following a charge of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, doctor-prescribed medication or illicit drugs is a matter of finding many or all of the prosecution’s key legal arguments to be defective.

As long-term DWI defense attorneys, the attorneys at my law firm have the skills and courtroom experience to identify problems with the prosecution’s case and use those to the client’s ultimate advantage. Depending on the particular circumstances surrounding the defendant’s arrest and subsequent charging in a drunk driving case, a skilled lawyer may be able to work out a favorable sentence, or better yet, help the accused motorist to avoid a conviction completely.
Continue reading

Not long ago we addressed the pitfalls and potentially life-changing consequences for professional drivers who are facing a possible conviction for drunken driving. As many readers will recall, my law firm understands how the threat of losing one’s commercial driver’s license (CDL) due to a drinking and driving charge can be more than overwhelming. Losing one’s ability to make a living due a suspended or revoked CDL can have an economic impact on an individual and his families far beyond that of the average office worker.

As New Jersey DWI defense lawyers, I and my legal team know that any loss of driving privileges can be disrupting to one’s daily life. It is understandable that anyone who uses a motor vehicle to get to and from work would be highly inconvenienced by a license suspension due to DWI, but generally that suspension would not affect most individuals’ livelihood in the way that a similar suspension would a affect a professional driver.

Semi tractor-trailer drivers, cabbies, delivery truck operators and tradesmen rely on their ability to use a company vehicle to directly generate an income. But here in the Garden State, when a person is convicted of a drunk driving offense, the possible loss of private driver’s license has a direct effect on that person’s CDL. And, we might add, when it comes to the rules and regulations surrounding possession of a CDL, federal law has much a lower limit on what is considered drunk driving.
Continue reading

Being in the legal profession gives me and my colleagues an advantage over the average person when it comes to understanding the possible consequences of many different civil and criminal offenses. For motorists here in the Garden State, one of the most serious — and the most potentially costly — is a driving while intoxicated charge. Combined with other related offenses, such as breath test refusal, DWI in a school zone, or drug DUI, the potential monetary penalties can total in the thousands of dollars.

As New Jersey DWI lawyers, the legal team at the law offices of Jonathan F. Marshall takes very seriously its responsibility to provide the best defense to drivers who have been accused of driving under the influence of alcohol, doctor-prescribed medications or illegal substances like marijuana or cocaine.

As adults, many drivers frequently find they are presented with a choice when enjoying an evening out with friends, family members or business associates. Given the opportunity to have a drink or two with others, any motorist must consider the consequences should he or she be stopped for a traffic violation not far from a restaurant or bar.
Continue reading

As with many drunk driving scenarios, the beginning of the ordeal for any motorist is usually when he notices a police car behind him with lights on and siren blasting. Unnerving as that initial moment may be for most, for those individuals who may have had a drink or two prior to the police stop the worst is yet to come. Never mind the embarrassment, the fear of being found guilty of drunken driving can result in a very awkward experience on the roadside.

As New Jersey trial lawyers experienced in defending motorists accused of intoxicated driving or drug DUI from taking some kind of prescription medication, we understand the trepidation that most anyone would feel after being called out by a New Jersey State trooper or municipal patrolman. We also know that if a person does not actively seek legal assistance to fight a drunk driving charge, the potential penalties for losing one’s case can be costly.

The skilled attorneys at our Monmouth County law firm are dedicated to providing a vigorous defense on behalf of our clients. In general, when considering whether or not one might retain counsel for a DWI-DUI or breath test refusal charge, it is important to ask a few questions. Top among these would be whether or not a prosecutor can prove you, as the driver, were intoxicated.
Continue reading

Here at the law offices of Jonathan F. Marshall, we have several former DWI prosecutors on our legal team. As such, I can say that we all have a healthy respect for the efforts and sacrifices made every day by city and county police officers and state troopers all across the Garden State. But that being said, as drunk driving defense attorneys we must, as part of our job, view any and all evidence used by the prosecution with a critical eye; questioning all sources of evidence that might be used against our clients in a court of law — even the professional observations, judgments and actions of those officers whom we respect.

The reason for this is simple. As drunken driving defense lawyers, we have an obligation to our clients, as well as to the law itself, to pursue the truth wherever it might lead. Many motorists in the state are charged with DWI, drug DUI, CDS possession, and other motor vehicle violations without strong evidence to support the state’s claim. While many drunken driving cases do result in a conviction and penalties for the defendant, still others end with the case being thrown out on technical grounds or from insufficient supporting evidence.

As hard as we work to protect the rights of those individual who are accused of operating a motor vehicle while impaired by alcohol or prescription medication, we find it disturbing whenever we hear of a patrolman or other law enforcement official who is arrested for breaking the very laws that he or she is sworn to uphold as part of their official duties. Hypocrisy is hardly a redeeming characteristic.
Continue reading

Reading about drunk driving arrests here and there in the news is obviously one way of gauging the number of intoxicated driving incidents that occur throughout the Garden State. But until one actually sees the extensive number of active and pending DWI court cases on the docket at courthouses throughout New Jersey it is difficult to imagine the sheer volume of DWI-related traffic offenses that gain the attention of our legal system on a weekly, monthly or yearly basis.

Of course, as experienced drunken driving defense attorneys, I and my staff of skilled trial lawyers live this story every day. We can easily comprehend the huge burden that DWI and drug DUI cases exert on our court system. Yet we also believe that every individual who is charged with an offense, be it civil or criminal, deserves his day in court should he choose to go that route. And why not? Every one accused of a crime, civil infraction or other statutory offense should seriously consider exercising his right to have his case be heard in a court of law.

It is for this reason that we always encourage motorists who feel they have been unjustly accused of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, doctor-prescribed medications or even illicit drugs, to take their case to court and fight for their rights under the law. Still, it is sobering for the public, if we may chose that term, to read articles like the one we ran into a short while back. The news item in question pointed out that Bergen County alone has a serious backlog of more than 500 drunk driving and DUI cases out of about 1,000 pending adjudication.
Continue reading

There is a good chance that as a motorist here in the Garden State, you or someone you know may have either seen or been subject to one of the many drunken driving roadblocks that pop up here and there across the state every month. For those who are unfamiliar with these “tools of the trade,” understand that they are designed to catch motorists who may be intoxicated behind the wheel by being located in areas know to have a statistically high incidence of DWI.

As New Jersey drunk driving lawyers, we seem to get numerous questions from potential clients regarding the legitimacy of these roadblocks, or DWI checkpoints as they are also referred. When asked by prospective clients, we must tell them that, yes, the constitutionality of these police roadblocks was addressed (back in 1979) by none other than the U.S. Supreme Court (Delaware v. Prouse).

In the aforementioned case, it was decided that it was unconstitutional to stop and detain a motorist without articulable suspicion that he or she is either unlicensed, his or her car is unregistered, or the vehicle or its occupant(s) is otherwise subject to seizure for a violation of law. This seemed like a win for those opposed to sobriety checkpoints, however the issue was again addressed here in New Jersey (State v. Kirk) in the 1980s.
Continue reading

As Garden State DWI defense attorneys, my aim and that of my team of skilled trial lawyers is to provide legal assistance to motorists who are unjustly accused of driving under the influence of beer, wine, hard liquor, doctor-prescribed medications or even illicit drugs. Whether the charge is simple in-car possession of a controlled dangerous substance (CDS), such as meth, weed or coke, of if the evidence suggests that a driver was illegally operating his or her automobile while impaired by alcohol, we are trained professionals who have many decades of collective experience in this area of the law.

Although it can be argued that the police have a much different take on driving while intoxicated, we understand that errors in judgment do happen from time to time, and not every drunken driving charge will be easily disproved, if at all. In the same way, however, it could be said that along with the extremely large volume of drunk driving arrests and subsequent court cases, that there will inevitably be injustices waiting to happen based on bad evidence or poor procedures on police department’s part.

We see all manner of drunk driving cases moving through our court system, in a variety of courtrooms throughout the Garden State. While New Jersey is not unique when it comes to the variety of DWI scenarios, we always find it interesting to review the different approaches that many motorists use to get themselves in trouble with local and state police. Here are just a few examples from Ocean County, NJ.
Continue reading

During most any traffic stop that appears to the officer in charge to involve drinking and driving, the motorist will likely be asked to perform a one or more of the standardized field sobriety tests (FSTs) as prescribed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). For those unfamiliar with these tests, they are comprised of a number of simple physical tasks — such as walking a straight line heel-to-toe or standing on one leg for 30 seconds — which police use to gauge a person’s level of impairment from drugs or alcohol.

Historically, law enforcement agencies have used these tests coupled with other observed symptoms of drunkenness — such as weaving in one’s lane — and the officer’s professional opinion to determine guilt and justify the arrest of a motorist for driving while intoxicated. Here in New Jersey, as well as the rest of the country, a patrolman must correctly administer the FSTs as approved by the NHTSA in a standardized manner in order to obtain a validated indicator of impairment and establish probable cause for a DWI-DUI arrest.

As common as the FSTs are in the daily duties of police officers all across the Garden State, they nonetheless represent one of the more controversial aspects of a drunk driving stop. In an effort to lend more credibility to these tests, the NHTSA developed a model training system for police officers and published numerous training manuals regarding the use and administration of FSTs. Even though the results of these test may be held up by the prosecution as proof of inebriation on the part of a driver, even experts in the field of DWI don’t agree on the effectiveness of FSTs.
Continue reading

Contact Information