IV. DISCOVERY IN DRUNK DRIVING CASES
(See also MOTOR VEHICLES [drunk driving],
this Digest)
R. 3:13-3 and R. 7:7-7 allow discovery of relevant
materials in drunk driving prosecutions, subject to
practical limitations. Thus, defendants are entitled to
discovery of relevant items which there is a reasonable
basis to believe will assist in the defense. State v. Young,
242 N.J. Super. 467, 470-73 (App. Div. 1990) (physical
production of ampules from the same batch used in
defendant’s breathalyzer tests is not a part of routine
discovery); State v. Ford, 240 N.J. Super. 44, 47-52 (App.
Div. 1990).
DISORDERLY PERSONSDISORDERLY PERSONSDISORDERLY PERSONSDISORDERLY PERSONSDISORDERLY PERSONS
I. INTRODUCTION
The statutory provisions relating to most disorderly
persons offenses may be found in Chapter 33 of the Code.
See also R. 7:1 et seq. Prosecution for a disorderly persons
offense or petty disorderly persons offense must be
commenced within one year after it is committed.
N.J.S.A. 2C:1-6b(2). The bright line separating crimes
from lesser offenses is exposure to imprisonment for more
than six months. Compare N.J.S.A. 2C:1-4a to N.J.S.A.
2C:1-4c; State v. Dively, 92 N.J. 573, 585 (1983); State
v. Owens, 54 N.J. 153, 157 (1969), cert. denied, 90 S.Ct.
593 (1970).N.J.S.A. 2C:1-4b bars imposition of certain
disabilities on persons convicted of offenses less serious
than “crimes.” See, e.g., State v. B.C., 235 N.J. Super. 157,
160 (Law Div. 1989), where it was held that a disorderly
persons offense is generally not admissible for the purpose
of impeaching the credibility of a witness. Some
collateral consequences that subsection b. does not bar
include forfeiture of office as provided by N.J.S.A. 2C:51-
1 and 2, see State v. Lazarchick, 314 N.J. Super. 500, 530-
34 (App. Div.), certif. denied, 157 N.J. 546 (1998); State
v. Lore, 197 N.J. Super. 277, 283 (App. Div.), certif.
denied, 99 N.J. 230 (1984); State v. Baber, 256 N.J.
Super. 240 (Law Div. 1992), and the presumption
against incarceration for those convicted of third and
fourth degree crimes. See State v. Battle, 256 N.J. Super.
268, 285-86 (App. Div.), certif. denied, 130 N.J. 393
(1992); State v. Kates, 185 N.J. Super. 226 (Law Div.
1982).II. JURISDICTION
State v. Saulnier, 63 N.J. 199 (1973) and State v.
Stern, 197 N.J. Super. 49 (App. Div. 1984), hold that the
Superior Court has the power to adjudicate both
indictable offenses and also any lesser-included non-
indictable offenses which arise therefrom. See State v.
Dively, 92 N.J. 573, 587 (1983), as well as N.J.S.A. 2C:1-
8d. Note also that even though both indictable and
lesser-included non-indictable offenses may now be tried
together in Superior Court, prosecutors are nonetheless
admonished to refrain from seeking indictments where
the circumstances call only for disorderly persons
proceedings in the municipal courts.In those cases where a prosecutor, in accordance with
his discretionary authority, chooses to downgrade