Do I need to engage legal representation in this case?

[Lot249]

New Jersey
My wife had an accident at a four-way stop intersection at approximately 7:30 pm. Witnesses reported seeing her stop and then proceeded into the intersection. No injuries were reported.
The responding officer asked if my wife was drinking. She responded that she had 1 drink at around 4:30 pm. He conducted a field sobriety test (heel to toe) and determined she was impaired and arrested her on suspicion of DUI. No other tickets were issued. My wife has a clean driving record, no accidents or summonses, of any kind, were issued in the past 35 years.

My wife is 77 and was wearing flip-flops at the time the test was given. Apparently, these two factors were not considered when the office decided she failed and he placed her under arrest. The aging process presents many challenges, and the ability to balance one's self is one.

After arriving at the police station, a breathalyzer test was administered. The test reported a 0.014 BAC. In New Jersey, a person recording a BAC of 0.8 or above is considered impaired.
I was told I need to retain legal counsel to assure the DUI charge was dismissed. The question I have is, what are my chances of having the charges dismissed if we go to court and represent ourselves? I know the saying "Anyone representing themselves, has a fool for a client". But given the circumstances, I find it very difficult to pay up to $4500 to plead a case that should be dismissed on its own merit. She was not impaired and the BAC test proved that fact.
Our court date is set for the 20th of this month.
Please advise. Thank you.

 

[Zigner]

After arriving at the police station, a breathalyzer test was administered. The test reported a 0.014 BAC. In New Jersey, a person recording a BAC of 0.8 or above is considered impaired.

You have the number wrong. .08 is the "per se" limit, which means the state wouldn't have to prove that she was impaired, as anyone at or above that level is presumed to be impaired. Because her BAC was under .08, the state will need to prove impairment, and proof can come from observation.
With that said, I'm SURE that the state has a solid case to present to justify the arrest. Her BAC in no way "proves" that she wasn't impaired, it just forces the state to prove it. YOU cannot represent your wife. Your wife, I'm sure, has no clue how the legal system works. She will almost definitely lose without the assistance of an attorney.

 

[Just Blue]

New Jersey
My wife had an accident at a four-way stop intersection at approximately 7:30 pm. Witnesses reported seeing her stop and then proceeded into the intersection. No injuries were reported.
The responding officer asked if my wife was drinking. She responded that she had 1 drink at around 4:30 pm. He conducted a field sobriety test (heel to toe) and determined she was impaired and arrested her on suspicion of DUI. No other tickets were issued. My wife has a clean driving record, no accidents or summonses, of any kind, were issued in the past 35 years.

My wife is 77 and was wearing flip-flops at the time the test was given. Apparently, these two factors were not considered when the office decided she failed and he placed her under arrest. The aging process presents many challenges, and the ability to balance one's self is one.

After arriving at the police station, a breathalyzer test was administered. The test reported a 0.014 BAC. In New Jersey, a person recording a BAC of 0.8 or above is considered impaired.
I was told I need to retain legal counsel to assure the DUI charge was dismissed. The question I have is, what are my chances of having the charges dismissed if we go to court and represent ourselves? I know the saying "Anyone representing themselves, has a fool for a client". But given the circumstances, I find it very difficult to pay up to $4500 to plead a case that should be dismissed on its own merit. She was not impaired and the BAC test proved that fact.
Our court date is set for the 20th of this month.
Please advise. Thank you.

In a legal sense, this has nothing to do with you. If you were to show up and attempt to represent your wife, that would be illegal unless you are a licensed attorney in NJ. It is not your court date, it is your wife's court date.

Your wife really does need an attorney.

 

[Taxing Matters]

New Jersey
Our court date is set for the 20th of this month.
Please advise. Thank you.

Then I suggest she get an attorney ASAP. The public has the misperception that blood alcohol content (BAC) must be over .08 to be guilty. And in pretty much every state that's the not the case. As Zinger pointed, if a driver has a BAC of .08 or greater then the driver is presumed intoxicated and the state needs no other evidence. But if it is under .08 one may still be charged and convicted of a DUI by state showing she was impaired and that she had been drinking. He own admission establishes the drinking and the field sobriety test (FST) she apparently flunked and would be good evidence of impairment. Thus, she made two critical mistakes: taking the field sobriety test (which in most, if not all states) is not mandatory and admitting to drinking. When pulled over for a DUI you must produce your license, give your name, and do the blood or breath test to measure the BAC. A refusal to do the breath/blood test is a charge on its own that typically results in loss of the license for 6 months or more for a first offense. But the FST she may refuse without penalty in every state I'm familiar with. The FST is a key piece of evidence to support impairment and is difficult for some people to do well stone cold sober for various reasons. So it's best just to politely refuse to do the FST even if you've had not a drop to drink.

What this means is that his case is not as easy as you imagined. You won't get the charges dismissed merely by producing the results of the BAC test. And if the cops recorded the FST and she was stumbling, leaning her body from one side to the other to prevent falling, etc, that video can have a powerful effect on a jury. Your wife needs a DUI lawyer, and as fast possible as the first hearing is set just about one month away and the attorney will need time to do discovery and plan the defense.

 

[zddoodah]

Do I need to engage legal representation in this case?

No. There is no need for you to do this. But your wife would be well-advised to do so.

what are my chances of having the charges dismissed if we go to court and represent ourselves?

"Ourselves"? This has nothing to do with you. Your wife may represent herself, but you may not legally represent her.

Our court date is set for the 20th of this month.

Her court date. What is the purpose of this court date? I assume it's an arraignment, at which she will enter a plea of guilty or not guilty. I'd suggest that she retain counsel ASAP.

 

[quincy]

New Jersey
My wife had an accident at a four-way stop intersection at approximately 7:30 pm. Witnesses reported seeing her stop and then proceeded into the intersection. No injuries were reported.
The responding officer asked if my wife was drinking. She responded that she had 1 drink at around 4:30 pm. He conducted a field sobriety test (heel to toe) and determined she was impaired and arrested her on suspicion of DUI. No other tickets were issued. My wife has a clean driving record, no accidents or summonses, of any kind, were issued in the past 35 years.

My wife is 77 and was wearing flip-flops at the time the test was given. Apparently, these two factors were not considered when the office decided she failed and he placed her under arrest. The aging process presents many challenges, and the ability to balance one's self is one.

After arriving at the police station, a breathalyzer test was administered. The test reported a 0.014 BAC. In New Jersey, a person recording a BAC of 0.8 or above is considered impaired.
I was told I need to retain legal counsel to assure the DUI charge was dismissed. The question I have is, what are my chances of having the charges dismissed if we go to court and represent ourselves? I know the saying "Anyone representing themselves, has a fool for a client". But given the circumstances, I find it very difficult to pay up to $4500 to plead a case that should be dismissed on its own merit. She was not impaired and the BAC test proved that fact.
Our court date is set for the 20th of this month.
Please advise. Thank you.

Your wife had a vehicle accident and she admitted to drinking and the officer said she failed the field test and she had an elevated BAC (albeit a low BAC). She should have an attorney. She probably can find one whose fee is less than $4500 but even $4500 seems a reasonable price to pay to avoid conviction, given the possible penalties.

Here is a link to the drunk driving sentencing law in New Jersey, followed by a link to the New Jersey State Bar Foundation where your wife can locate attorneys in your area.

https://casetext.com/statute/new-jersey-statutes/title-39-motor-vehicles-and-traffic-regulation/chapter-394-application-of-chapter/section-394-5017-sentencing-drunk-driving-offenders-use-of-ignition-interlock-device-required#:~:text=39:4-50 whose blood,or more than one year.

https://njsbf.org/about-njsbf/legal-resourceslinks/

Did your wife report her accident to her car insurer? What sort of damage was there to the cars involved?

 

[adjusterjack]

Another good reason for an attorney is your auto insurance. A DUI conviction and/or license suspension may allow for immediate cancellation of your auto insurance. If not, then certainly non-renewal. Either way, your insurance rates are likely to double or triple.

 

[quincy]

Another good reason for an attorney is your auto insurance. A DUI conviction and/or license suspension may allow for immediate cancellation of your auto insurance. If not, then certainly non-renewal. Either way, your insurance rates are likely to double or triple.

If other cars were damaged in the accident, the insurance is already at risk, with or without the complications of a DUI.

 

[adjusterjack]

If other cars were damaged in the accident, the insurance is already at risk, with or without the complications of a DUI.

True.

But without a conviction, the chance of cancellation or non-renewal is substantially reduced and any surcharge may be considerably less than the cost of obtaining new insurance.

 

[quincy]

Lot249’s wife really should have an attorney.

 

[adjusterjack]

Absolutely.

 

[quincy]

One factor not covered yet is the unsteadiness of the wife during the field sobriety test which led the arrest. Lot249 mentioned that balance issues are not uncommon in older people - and that’s true - but Lot249’s wife probably should see a doctor in addition to seeing an attorney if for no other reason than to make sure there is not an underlying health problem that should be addressed.

 

[LdiJ]

One factor not covered yet is the unsteadiness of the wife during the field sobriety test which led the arrest. Lot249 mentioned that balance issues are not uncommon in older people - and that’s true - but Lot249’s wife probably should see a doctor in addition to seeing an attorney if for no other reason than to make sure there is not an underlying health problem that should be addressed.

I agree, although I also could not pass a typical field sobriety test either, for the same reasons. I don't have any particular, underlying health problem. For me it's just pretty much the peculiarities of getting older.

 

[quincy]

I agree, although I also could not pass a typical field sobriety test either, for the same reasons. I don't have any particular, underlying health problem. For me it's just pretty much the peculiarities of getting older.

That’s good. And I suspect that most are like you.

But, if the wife wants to have the results of the FST tossed, she might want to make sure her unsteadiness can be explained away as just a common no-reason-to-worry age-related condition and not something that possibly could be a reason for a restriction on or a suspension of her driver’s license.

 

[Zigner]

I've had injuries to both ankles that make me question my ability to perform the FST. Of course, I've never had the pleasure of being required to do so...