New trial ordered where Judge conducted questioning of defense expert State v. O’Brien __ NJ __ (A-89-08)

New trial ordered where Judge conducted questioning of defense expert

State v. O’Brien __ NJ __ (A-89-08) 12-29-09
Defendant was entitled to face a single adversary, the State. He should not have had to bear the consequences of a judge who appeared to disbelieve him and his expert witness, revealed that disbelief to the jury, and supported a witness adverse to him. Because that conduct was clearly capable of producing an unjust result, a new trial is in order.

State v Ciancaglini __ NJ Super. __ (App. Div. 2010) A-2785-08T4

State v Ciancaglini __ NJ Super. __ (App. Div. 2010)
A-2785-08T4 01-07-10
In this appeal from a DWI conviction, after prior separate DWI and refusal convictions, this Appellate panel disagree with the holding of State v. DiSomma, 262 N.J. Super. 375 (App. Div. 1993), and hold that the prior refusal conviction does count toward making this a third offense. Our holding is consistent with a line of cases both before and after DiSomma concluding that a prior DWI conviction counts toward enhancement of the sentence imposed for a refusal conviction. See, e.g., State v. Tekel, 281 N.J. Super. 502 (App. Div. 1995). The court also held that double jeopardy does not bar reinstatement of the sentence originally imposed in the municipal court for a third DWI offense, which was reduced in the Law Division to a sentence for a first DWI offense.