Kenneth Vercammen is past president of the Middlesex County NJ Municipal Court Prosecutor's Association. He served as the Cranbury Township Prosecutor. Ken is a NJ trial attorney who has published 130 articles in national and New Jersey publications on Criminal Law and litigation topics. He was awarded the NJ State State Bar Municipal Court Practitioner of the Year. He lectures to police departments as a volunteer on criminal cases, Municipal Court, DWI, traffic and other litigation matters. He is co- Chair of the ABA Criminal Law Committee,GP and was a speaker at the 2012 ABA Annual Meeting attended by 10,000 attorneys and professionals. To schedule a confidential consultation, email us at VercammenAppointments@NJlaws.com, call or

visit Website www.njlaws.com

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.

2053 Woodbridge Avenue - Edison, NJ 08817

(732) 572-0500

April 3, 2014

transcript for driving-while-intoxicated cases are hereby relaxed


SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY
It is ORDERED, pursuant to N.J. Const., Art. VI, sec. 2, par. 3, that effective immediately the provisions of Rules 3:5-3(b) and 3:5-5(b) of the Rules Governing the Courts of the State of New Jersey that require that a transcript be made, that the judge certify the transcript, or that the affiant sign the transcript in connection with the issuance of search warrants by telephone, radio or other means of electronic communication for nonconsensual blood testing in driving-while-intoxicated cases are hereby relaxed so as not to be mandatory.
This will supplement the Order dated October 8, 2013 and shall continue in effect until further Order of the Court.
page1image6496 page1image6656 page1image6816
Dated: March 4, 2014 

March 26, 2014

Surcharges in NJ

Surcharges in NJ
New Jersey statute* require the Motor Vehicle
Commission to collect surcharges from motorists
whose driving records include certain motor
vehicle offenses.
These surcharges are in addition to any courtimposed
fines and penalties or any premiums
assessed by insurance companies.
Who is Responsible?
You are responsible for paying the surcharge
even if you move out of NJ. The surcharge is
imposed regardless of your current license,
registration and/or insurance status.
When are They Due?
The due date for surcharge payments is printed
on the bill. If you fail to pay the surcharge in full,
or begin an installment payment plan (IPP) by
that date, your driving privilege will be indefinitely
suspended and a $100 fee will be charged on
restoration. An unsatisfied surcharge will lead
to a Notice of Proposed Judgment, and MVC
may file a Certificate of Debt in the New Jersey
Superior Court to collect the full balance, the
interest and the collection costs.
The judgment and collection processes will
occur even if your driving privilege is suspended
for other reasons and you are ineligible for
restoration.
*(N.J.S.A. 17:29A-35)
What Violations are Subject
to Surcharges?
The surcharge for operating under the influence
or refusal, whether it occurs in New Jersey or
another state, is $1,000 a year for three years for
both a first and a second violation. A surcharge
of $1,500 a year for three years is imposed
for a third or subsequent violation that occurs
within three years of the first violation. If you
are convicted of both drunk driving and refusal
resulting from the same arrest, you will only
receive one surcharge.
Point Violations
(Effective July 1, 2004)
If you accumulate six or more points in a period
of three years or less you must pay an insurance
surcharge of $150 for the first six points and $25
for each additional point. The point surcharge will
remain in effect as long as you have six or more
points on your record resulting from violations
posted in the immediate past three years. The
accumulation is calculated from the posting date
to your driving record, not when the violations
occurred.
ALCOHOL AND DRUG RELATED OFFENSES
VIOLATIONS ON OR AFTER
In-state operating under
the influence of liquor
or drugs (DUI)
February 10, 1983
Out-of-state DUI January 26, 1984
Refusal to submit to
chemical test
January 26, 1984
Point reductions issued for one year of
violation or suspension-free driving, or
for completion of a driver improvement
school or defensive driving course are
not considered in reviewing the three-year
record for surcharge purposes.
Other actions subject to
surcharges**
(on or after March 19, 1984)
**Regulation N.J.A.C. 13:19-13.1 et seq.
***These surcharges are assessed each year for three years.
Operating While Suspended
(Increased penalty effective July 1, 1994)
If your driving privilege is suspended as a result
of failure to pay insurance surcharges and you
are convicted of operating while suspended, the
court is mandated to impose an additional $3,000
fine. Pay the surcharge in full before your court
appearance and you will avoid this extra fine.
Paying the Surcharges
You can pay your surcharge by check or money
order if you:
• include the bottom portion of your notice
• include your NJ driver license number on your
check or money order, and
• use the envelope provided; or,
by MasterCard, VISA or Discover if you:
• call 1-888-651-9999 toll-free
DO NOT SEND CASH
YEARLY ASSESSMENT***
Unlicensed driver $100
No insurance - Moped $100
Driving while suspended,
court or MVC reported
$250
No liability insurance on
motor vehicle$250
source: http://www.state.nj.us/mvc/pdf/Violations/ISS-50.pdf

March 4, 2014

STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. RAMIER A. DUNBAR

STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. RAMIER A. DUNBAR
 A-5722-12T2

In response to a report of a shooting, officers
arrived within moments at a location where approximately
thirty persons had congregated. The officers' attention
was drawn immediately to defendant, who appeared nervous
and briefly ducked into an alley as others dispersed.
Defendant walked away, keeping the marked patrol car in
view, while the officers attempted to speak to him about
the report. In response, defendant merely continued to
walk away, looking back over his shoulder. One officer
stepped out of the patrol car and asked defendant to stop.
Defendant began to run, then discarded a handgun. We find
the facts, when combined, established reasonable suspicion
making the stop lawful. We therefore reverse the trial
court's order suppressing the evidence. 02/26/24

STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. J.B.W.


STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. J.B.W.
A-0527-13T4

The question presented is whether the term "youth
serving organization," as defined in N.J.S.A. 2C:7-22,
excludes organizations that work in cooperation with a
public school and its staff to promote a school program.
We conclude that such organizations are not excluded.
02/24/14

February 18, 2014

STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. DANIELLE N. DIANGELO

STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. DANIELLE N. DIANGELO
A-2230-11T1

We consider whether the scope of the Supreme Court's holding announced in State v. Hernandez, 208 N.J. 24 (2011), addressing jail credit calculations, extends to a defendant sentenced to a custodial term for a violation of probation (VOP). We conclude the public policy expressed by the Court in Hernandez equally applies to VOP sentences. Following this policy, we determine the issuance of the VOP statement of charges to a defendant held in custody triggers the right to receive jail credits against the VOP sentence for a defendant's period of pre-adjudication custody, as well as against the new offense, irrespective of whether a VOP summons or warrant was issued. Accordingly, the trial court's order denying defendant's application for jail credits against her VOP sentence is reversed.
02/13/14

STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. RAYMOND E. TROXELL

STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. RAYMOND E. TROXELL
A-3730-10T2

Defendant was convicted of murder as an accomplice to his co-defendant, Marsh. The jury answered a specific interrogatory finding that defendant "as an accomplice [to Marsh] procured the commission of the offense by payment or promise of payment . . . ." N.J.S.A. 2C:11-3(b)(4). The finding of this "triggering event" made defendant eligible for a mandatory sentence of life without parole. The jury subsequently found aggravating factor (e), resulting in imposition of the mandatory sentence.

On appeal, defendant argued for the first time that the judge was required to provide the jury with instructions that permitted it to return a "non-unanimous" verdict on the triggering event, analogizing the situation to prior death penalty jurisprudence which required such a charge.

We concluded that, pursuant to the 2007 amendments that repealed New Jersey's death penalty and made significant changes to N.J.S.A. 2C:11-3, such an non-unanimity instruction is not required or appropriate, nor was there any independent constitutional basis requiring
the instruction. We affirmed defendant's conviction and sentence. 02/13/14
 

State v. Joseph Diorio (A-110-11; 069597)


State v. Joseph Diorio (A-110-11; 069597)

 For purposes of the statute of limitations, when a
defendant engages in a scheme to obtain the property
of another by deception, theft by deception is a
continuing offense. If the scheme involves the
promise to pay at a later date, the limitations period
does not commence until the day after payment is due.
Money laundering is a continuous offense only when
there is evidence of successive acts that facilitate
the common scheme to defraud. Applying these
principles here, the statute of limitations on the
theft by deception charge expired prior to return of
the indictment, thereby barring Diorio’s prosecution
for that offense. In contrast, the money laundering
charge was timely since the relevant transactions
occurred within five years before the indictment was
filed. 2-12-14