officers can also rely upon the facts and circumstances
within their knowledge, and upon the totality of the
circumstances. Schneider v. Simonini, 163 N.J. 336, 361
(2000), cert. denied, U.S. , 69 U.S.L.W. 3399
(2001). An otherwise legal warrantless arrest does not
become illegal because a warrant could have been
obtained. State v. Henry, 133 N.J. at 111.
The Motor Vehicle Act specifically requires a
violation to have occurred in an officer’s presence to
support a warrantless arrest. See, N.J.S.A. 39:5-25;
Sanducci, 315 N.J. Super. at 475; State v. Judge, 275 N.J.
Super. at 200. See also, State v. O’Donnell, 192 N.J. Super.
128 (App. Div. 1983) (arrest proper when motor vehicle
violation occurred within presence of officer notwith-
standing that violation occurred beyond officer’s
territorial jurisdiction); State v. Seymour, 289 N.J. Super.
80 (App. Div. 1996) (where trooper signaled driver to
stop and driver attempted to elude trooper vehicle, arrest
was proper).
The probable cause necessary to support an arrest
does not require that the officer actually see the vehicle in
motion. See State v. Garbin, 325 N.J. Super. 521 (App.
Div. 1999) (warrantless arrest warranted under N.J.S.A.
39:4-50, where defendant was in truck in his garage with
tires spinning and truck pushing up against garage),
certif. denied, 164 N.J. 560 (2000).
Police may arrest a suspect in his or her home without
a warrant when in “hot pursuit” and under “exigent
circumstances.” State v. Jones, 143 N.J. 4, 19 (1995).
However, it is unreasonable for police in hot pursuit to
follow an individual suspected of committing disorderly
persons offenses into a residence to make a warrantless
arrest. Welsh v. Wisconsin, 466 U.S. 740, 104 S.Ct. 2091,
80 L.Ed.2d 732 (1984) (police cannot make warrantless
in-home arrest for traffic offense); Payton v. New York,
445 U.S. 573, 100 S.Ct. 1371, 63 L.Ed.2d 639 (1980)
(invalidated New York law that permitted warrantless in-
home arrests for felonies); State v. Bolte, 115 N.J. 579,
cert. denied, 493 U.S. 936, 110 S.Ct. 330, 107 L.Ed.2d
320 (1989) (cannot make warrantless in-home arrest for
traffic violations).
B. Juveniles (See also, JUVENILES, this Digest)
Juveniles are subject to the same criteria for lawful
arrest as adults, supplemented by additional rules of
court pertaining to juvenile offenses. State ex rel. J.B., 131
N.J. Super. 6, 14 (J. & D. R. Ct. 1974); State v. Torres,
313 N.J. Super. 129, 145 (App. Div.) (“[o]ur Legislature
has accorded juveniles all rights given to adults charged
with a crime”), certif. denied, 156 N.J. 425 (1998); State
v. Ferguson, 255 N.J. Super. 530 (App. Div. 1992); see,
N.J.S.A. 2A:4A-40 (defenses available to adults are also
available to juveniles). A law enforcement officer may
take into custody without process a juvenile whom the
officer has probable cause to believe is delinquent as
defined by N.J.S.A. 2A:4A-23. See R. 5:21-1; N.J.S.A.
2A:4A-31a. The taking of a juvenile into custody is not
to be construed as an arrest. It is instead considered “a
measure to protect the health, morals and well-being of
the juvenile.” N.J.S.A. 2A:4A-31c; R. 5:21-1. Probable
cause in delinquency cases is exactly the same as in adult
offenses. State ex rel. J.B., 131 N.J. Super. at 14.There is no requirement that a police officer obtain an
arrest warrant before going to a dwelling to question the
occupants concerning the whereabouts of a juvenile
delinquent. State v. Cooper, 211 N.J. Super. 1 (App. Div.
1986).C. Nature and Source of Information
An ordinary citizen who reports a crime occupies a
different status as a source of information for a warrantless
arrest than the traditional police informer. Wildoner v.
Borough of Ramsey, 162 N.J. at 390; State v. Davis, 104
N.J. 490, 506 (1986); Sanducci v. City of Hoboken, 315
N.J. Super. at 482; State v. Canola, 135 N.J. Super. 224,
230 (App. Div. 1975), modified on other grounds, 73 N.J.
206 (1977). A citizen informer may generally be
regarded as trustworthy and motivated by factors
consistent with law enforcement. Wildoner, 162 N.J. at
391 (citizens who report criminal activity have indicia of
reliability)); State v. Lakomy, 126 N.J. Super. 430, 435
(App. Div. 1974) (citizens who report crime do not
expect monetary gain in exchange for information).
Accordingly, there is no need to verify the credibility and
reliability of this individual before appropriate police
action is undertaken. State v. Canola, 135 N.J. Super. at- Information from a known citizen who was merely
unidentified by name can provide probable cause for a
warrantless arrest. State v. Sibilia, 330 N.J. Super. 496
(App. Div. 2000) (unnamed citizen who told police of
illegal narcotics sales, described defendant, escorted
police and pointed out defendant).
To satisfy a finding of probable cause, the citizen’s
information should come from personal observation or
knowledge. State v. Gagen, 162 N.J. Super. 105, 113
(App. Div. 1978); see, Wildoner, 162 N.J. at 391 (after
overhearing defendant threaten wife, citizen telephoned
police and then “waited at scene and confirmed her report