Opinion
DOCKET NO. A-0204-13T3
09-18-2014
STATE OF NEW JERSEY, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. JUDY MEDINA, Defendant-Appellant.
Peter M. O'Mara argued the cause for appellant (The O'Mara Law Firm, attorneys; Mr. O'Mara, on the brief). Monica do Outeiro, Special Deputy Attorney General/Acting Assistant Prosecutor, argued the cause for respondent (Christopher J. Gramiccioni, Acting Monmouth County Prosecutor, attorney; Mary R. Juliano, Special Deputy Attorney General/Acting Assistant Prosecutor, of counsel; Ashley L. Behre, Special Deputy Attorney General/Acting Assistant Prosecutor, on the brief).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION Before Judges Fasciale and Hoffman. On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Monmouth County, Municipal Appeal No. 13-018. Peter M. O'Mara argued the cause for appellant (The O'Mara Law Firm, attorneys; Mr. O'Mara, on the brief). Monica do Outeiro, Special Deputy Attorney General/Acting Assistant Prosecutor, argued the cause for respondent (Christopher J. Gramiccioni, Acting Monmouth County Prosecutor, attorney; Mary R. Juliano, Special Deputy Attorney General/Acting Assistant Prosecutor, of counsel; Ashley L. Behre, Special Deputy Attorney General/Acting Assistant Prosecutor, on the brief). PER CURIAM
Following a trial de novo in the Law Division, defendant appeals from her conviction for driving while intoxicated (DWI), N.J.S.A. 39:4-50. We affirm.
On June 17, 2012, at approximately 1:30 a.m., Officer Brian Dreher observed defendant operating a Hyundai erratically. He watched defendant change lanes without using her directional signal, almost striking the curb on two occasions. The officer followed defendant and saw her miss the curb for a third time, nearly striking another vehicle. He stopped defendant's Hyundai, approached the vehicle, and noticed defendant's hands were fumbling and that she dropped her vehicle registration card. The officer smelled an odor of alcohol emanating from defendant's window, at which point defendant admitted to the officer that she was coming from a bar and had consumed alcohol. Another officer arrived at the scene, defendant exited the Hyundai, and Officer Dreher conducted field sobriety tests, which defendant failed. He arrested defendant for DWI, transported her to headquarters, where another officer administered an Alcotest.
A Municipal Court judge suppressed the results of the Alcotest because the State produced discovery untimely.
In April 2013, a Municipal Court judge conducted a trial and took testimony from Officer Dreher and defendant. He believed the officer's testimony and found defendant guilty of DWI, sentenced her as a two-time offender by suspending her license for two years, and imposing the appropriate fines and penalties. Defendant appealed her DWI conviction to the Law Division.
In August 2013, Judge Joseph W. Oxley conducted a de novo trial and found defendant guilty of DWI. The judge issued an oral opinion, suspended defendant's license for two years, and imposed the correct fines and penalties. The judge relied on the State's observation evidence to find defendant guilty of DWI, stating that
defendant admits to drinking just before driving. She was driving erratically. She failed the field sobriety tests, there was an odor of alcohol emanating from her[,] and again from her when she was being transported to the police station. She was swaying and staggering, her speech was slurred[,] . . . she was rambling[,] and her eyes were bloodshot and watery.
I also find important that [defendant stated to Officer Dreher that] a friend had followed her home . . . because the friend knew [that defendant] had been drinking and was worried for [defendant's] safety.
On appeal, defendant argues that the State produced insufficient observation evidence to find her guilty of DWI beyond a reasonable doubt. After carefully considering the record and the briefs, we conclude that defendant's arguments are "without sufficient merit to warrant discussion in a written opinion," R. 2:11-3(e)(2), and affirm substantially for the reasons expressed by Judge Oxley. We add the following brief remarks.
When a defendant appeals a decision made by a municipal court to the Law Division, the court is required to conduct a de novo review of the record, giving "due regard to the municipal judge's opportunity to view the witnesses and assess credibility." State v. Golin, 363 N.J. Super. 474, 481 (App. Div. 2003) (citing State v. Johnson, 42 N.J. 146, 157 (1964)). On appeal from the Law Division's decision, we must determine whether the Law Division judge's findings "could reasonably have been reached on sufficient credible evidence in the record." State v. Locurto, 157 N.J. 463, 471 (1999) (quoting Johnson, supra, 42 N.J. at 162). Applying this standard, we see no error.
A DWI conviction may be based upon physical evidence, "such as symptoms observed by the arresting police officers or failure of [the] defendant to perform adequately on balance and coordination tests . . . ." State v. Ghegan, 213 N.J. Super. 383, 385 (App. Div. 1986); see also State v. Liberatore, 293 N.J. Super. 580, 589 (Law Div. 1995), aff'd o.b., 293 N.J. Super. 535 (App. Div. 1996). A defendant's demeanor, physical appearance, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes, together with an odor of alcohol or an admission of the consumption of alcohol and poor performance on field sobriety tests, are sufficient to sustain a DWI conviction. State v. Bealor, 187 N.J. 574, 588-89 (2006); State v. Morris, 262 N.J. Super. 413, 421-22 (App. Div. 1993).
Here, defendant admitted to the officer that she was coming from a bar and drank alcohol before she drove; the officer observed defendant change lanes without using her directional signal, missing the curb on three separate occasions and almost striking another vehicle; he smelled an odor of alcohol emanating from defendant's driver's window as he approached the Hyundai at the scene, and that odor filled his police vehicle as he transported her to headquarters; he watched defendant swaying, staggering, and struggling with sagging knees; he noticed that defendant talked slowly, her speech was slurring and rambling, her eyes were bloodshot and watery, and that her hands were fumbling; and defendant failed the field sobriety tests.
Affirmed I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the original on file in my office.
CLERK OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION