NJ-Law-GarcesGrabler.com

26 Arrested In Underage Drinking Raid

Twenty-six people, including three bar employees and 23 underage patrons, were arrested early July 13 at Scarlet Pub, a bar located near the Rutgers University campus, in New Brunswick, NJ, according to Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control Director Jerry Fischer. The arrests were made after ABC investigators received a tip that the bar was crowded with underage drinkers.

Twenty-two patrons were charged with underage drinking, including four who were also charged with presenting a fake identification card. One additional patron was charged strictly with presenting a fake identification. All 23 patrons are from New Jersey.

“Those under the age of 21 need to know that if they break the law by drinking alcohol, they could face serious consequences,” said Director Fischer. “We are partnering with local and county law enforcement agencies to prevent underage drinking, which endangers the young people involved as well as the public at large.”

Scarlet Pub’s liquor license will be reviewed by ABC for possible administrative charges. Those charges could result in the suspension of the bar’s alcoholic beverage license. The charge of selling alcohol to underage patrons is a disorderly persons offense which carries penalties including a fine of at least $500. Underage drinking is also a disorderly persons offense, carrying a potential fine of at least $500 and a six-month driver’s license suspension.

The arrests are part of the Division’s ongoing efforts to combat underage drinking in an around college communities throughout New Jersey.

This message has been brought to you by the New Jersey Criminal Defense Attorneys at Garces & Grabler, P.C.

Trenton, New Jersey Man Charged With Robbing Bank In Dress Disguise

A Trenton man who allegedly robbed a bank last month in Mercerville, N.J., appeared in federal court this afternoon to face a related charge, U.S. Attorney Paul J. Fishman announced.

Kenneth Darrian, 25, appeared before U.S. Magistrate Judge Lois H. Goodman on a Complaint charging him with one count of bank robbery.

According to the Complaint filed on July 5, 2011, and statements made in court:

Darrian entered the Mercerville Chase Bank on June 23, 2011, dressed in a tan sleeveless dress and a woman’s wig. He approached the teller counter and inquired about purchasing a money order. When the teller began to help him, Darrian pulled what appeared to be a black handgun from a bag he was carrying and pointed it at the teller. He then vaulted the counter, demanded the teller drawer be opened, and reached into the drawer for the cash.

Witnesses and surveillance video led a Trenton police officer to locate the defendant’s vehicle outside his residence in Trenton.

Darrian was arrested on June 27, 2011, by the Hamilton Police Department in relation to other matters, and has been held by the state since that time. He was returned state custody following today’s proceeding pending the resolution of those matters.

If convicted of the robbery, Darrian faces a maximum potential penalty of 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

Brought to you by New Jersey Criminal Defense attorneys at Garces & Grabler, P.C.

Attorney General Announces Strict Reforms to Curtail Improper Steroid Use Among Law Enforcement in New Jersey

New Jersey Attorney General Paula T. Dow announced July 7 a number of stringent reforms designed to curtail the improper prescription, distribution, possession and usage of anabolic steroids, Human Growth Hormone (HGH) and Human Chorionic Gonadotropin (HCG) among law enforcement personnel and state and local employees.

The reforms follow an assessment by a Study Group which was tasked by the Attorney General with examining law enforcement drug testing policies, the role physicians may play when these drugs are improperly dispensed, greater insurance and prescription monitoring, and the costs to the public.

According to the report, issued by the Study Group, the legitimate medical uses of steroids, HGH and HCG are limited to a very small number of medical conditions. However, because there was little scrutiny until recently of prescription claims filed by law enforcement officers and others receiving steroids, HGH and HCG, the potential for improper prescribing of these substances was high. In addition, the lack of disciplinary action by regulators against physicians who improperly prescribed these substances and the failure to adequately screen and monitor prescription drugs created a recipe for abuse.

“It is important that we strengthen oversight, regulation and investigation in order to discourage the improper use of steroids throughout New Jersey’s law enforcement community and ensure the public’s confidence,” said Attorney General Dow. “Law enforcement holds a special trust based on its authority and must be held to the highest standard of professionalism. These reforms tighten the safeguards against abuse not only by law enforcement, but by other members of public health plans and doctors who improperly prescribe these substances.”

Brought to you by New Jersey attorneys Garces & Grabler, P.C.

Read more…

How to Beat a DWI in New Jersey

Obviously if you arrived at this article it is because you want to learn how to beat a DWI or DUI in the State of New Jersey or maybe you are trying to beat a DWI in one of the other states. It could be that you are planning on drinking and driving and want to figure out a way out of the inevitable.  Or quite possibly you or someone you know has been charged with a DWI in the State of New Jersey.

My first advice is don’t drink and drive in New Jersey or any other state, period. This can be accomplished by having a designated driver agree not to drink, thereby getting you and your friends home safely without endangering the lives of others.  If you do that you will always beat a DWI in New Jersey. However if you have already been charged with a DWI it is important that you get a qualified and experienced New Jersey DWI lawyer.

Not only will you lose your driving privileges if convicted of a DWI in New Jersey, you could also face time in jail on a second or subsequent offense. Also, the additional insurance costs and MVC or DMV surcharges alone if convicted of a DWI in New Jersey will cost several thousands of dollars, and/or cancellation of your insurance.

At Garces & Grabler, P.C. our New Jersey DWI lawyers can help.

Here are a few examples of how our New Jersey DWI  lawyers and our defense team will fight to exclude evidence from your case that may result in a dismissal of your DUI or DWI charge in New Jersey:

• You were illegally stopped
• The Field Sobriety Tests do not reliably indicate that there was even probable cause to arrest you to compel submissions to breath testing
• Breath test operator was unlicensed or had expired license
• The officer failed to read the Implied Consent Warning
• Breath test machine was not properly operated
• There were errors with the new Alcotest 7110 MKIII-C machine as documented in its embedded memory systems
• There was a language barrier and you did not understand that the officer advised you that you had the right to obtain an independent blood/urine test
• The alcohol reading was contaminated by asthma spray, cough drops, paint, fingernail polish (all of which contain alcohol)
• You were physically forced to give blood or urine
• A refusal charge only applies to breath testing and not to the refusal of giving blood or urine
• Videos and/or dispatch tape(s) do not show that you were intoxicated
• Prosecution failed to provide our DUI defense lawyers with complete discovery (all of the investigations/reports on your case)
• Court failed to provide a speedy trial

Frequently Asked Questions About DWI/DUI

What is “blood alcohol concentration”?

Can I refuse a Breath Test?

Are Breath-Test results always accurate?

What if I lose my license from a DWI or Refusal conviction but continue to drive?

What is the punishment for drunk driving?

How can I get to work if I cannot drive?

If I simply intend to plead guilty, why do I need a lawyer?ave the experience

If you have been charged with a DWI in  New Jersey, at the law offices of Garces & Grabler, P.C. we  have  experienced and qualified New Jersey DWI lawyers ready to help win your case. We  have 7 law offices throughout New Jersey.

Call now to make an appointment. 1-866-951-8387

New Jersey DWI Lawyers

Apple and BlackBerry pull DUI Checkpoint Apps

Apple has agreed to ban from its online store future applications that inform users of checkpoints not publicized by police. In a similar move, RIM, maker of the BlackBerry, has agreed to remove their downloadable DUI checkpoint applications from its online store.

The move comes in response to a request by four U.S. Democratic senators — Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey, Charles Schumer of New York, Harry Reid of Nevada, and Tom Udall of New Mexico – in a letter asking Apple, Google and RIM to either disable or stop selling downloadable applications that allow iPhone and iPad, BlackBerry and Android operating systems to identify locations of local police DUI crackdowns.

Source: USA Today

Get the whole story here

If you or someone you care about has been affected by Drinking and Driving in New Jersey, contact the New Jersey law firm of Garces & Grabler, P.C. for a free consultation.

If you have received a DWI contact the New Jersey DWI lawyers at Garces & Grabler, P.C.

We have 7 convenient law offices in New Jersey.

Reminding Students to Stay Safe and Sober During Prom and Graduation

The New Jersey DWI Lawyers at Garces & Grabler, P.C. would like to remind all students to stay safe and sober during prom and graduation seasons. Statistics for New Jersey DWI related deaths, accidents and arrests during the graduation season speak for themselves.

Remember this is a time of joy and celebration but unfortunately many lives are impacted when a drunk driver gets behind the wheel of a vehicle. Be responsible if you are drinking – be sure to have an assigned designated driver who will stay completely sober. There are many safe ways to get home when you have been drinking and driving is not one of them.  New Jersey DWI laws carry stiff penalties and  are not to be taken lightly.

Remember driving is a privilege and with that come many responsibilities to yourself and to others.

In New Jersey, you must be at least 21 years of age to purchase, possess or consume alcoholic beverages.

There are serious consequences for underage drinking and driving in New Jersey.

Also remember that providing alcohol to minors in New Jersey is against the law.

If you or someone you care about has been affected by Drinking and Driving in New Jersey, contact the New Jersey law firm of Garces & Grabler, P.C. for a free consultation.

If you have received a DWI contact the New Jersey DWI lawyers at Garces & Grabler, P.C.

We have 7 convenient law offices in New Jersey.

Division on Civil Rights Announces Finding of Probable Cause in Case of Student Allegedly Targeted for Race-Based Bullying

Division on Civil Rights Director Chinh Q. Le announced today that the Division has issued a Finding of Probable Cause against the Board of Education in Franklin Township, Gloucester County, for allegedly not taking sufficient steps to end the race-based bullying of a student that went on for nearly four years.

Named as sole Respondent in the Finding of Probable Cause, the Franklin Township Board of Education oversees an elementary district made up of four schools. According to the Division, the district did not deal adequately with the persistent verbal harassment of an African-American female student that began when the victim was in third grade and continued through her sixth-grade year. The alleged harassment consisted of race-based name calling and other bias-driven remarks by other students on the school bus and elsewhere while the girl attended Main Road School from 2005 through 2009.

“Our investigation suggests this girl was subjected to repeated racial harassment,” said Director Le. “The student conduct described in this case is deplorable, and the lack of a genuinely effective response by the school district illustrates a concern we are committed to addressing statewide through both awareness and enforcement.”

The Franklin Township school district has denied that it engaged in unlawful discrimination, or that the girl was a victim of racial harassment or a hostile school environment. The district also has asserted that any incidents of harassment or bullying reported by the girl were investigated immediately by administrators and acted on appropriately. In addition, the district has said it takes a proactive approach to preventing harassment, intimidation and bullying, and to educating students regarding diversity.

However, the Finding of Probable Cause notes that the alleged harassment persisted over a four-year span despite numerous complaints from the girl’s parents to the school’s principal and the Franklin Township schools superintendent.

According to the Finding of Probable Cause, the girl was so distraught over the harassment she told her parents she did not wish to go to school. In May 2006, she missed a total of 15 days. Her parents requested she be transferred to another school for the coming academic year and were denied.

The race-based harassment continued during the girl’s fourth-grade year and in subsequent years, until she graduated Main Road School in June 2009. The harassment involved multiple alleged offenders, and reported incidents increased in number and intensity.

Division Director Le said that, for school districts, responding to reported incidents of bullying after-the-fact may not be sufficient in cases where educators have been made aware of a pattern of repeated harassment.

“School districts have a responsibility to create and maintain a harassment-free learning environment. And they have a legal duty, when confronted with reports a student is being bullied, to take affirmative steps that are ‘reasonably calculated’ to end it,” said Le.

A Finding of Probable Cause does not resolve a civil rights complaint. Rather, it means the State has concluded its preliminary investigation and determined there is sufficient evidence to support a reasonable suspicion New Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination (LAD) has been violated. The LAD provides that each Respondent found to have committed a violation is subject to a penalty of up to $10,000. The LAD also provides for other remedies, including compensatory damages and injunctive relief, such as changes in the employer’s policies and management/staff training.

Now that the Division has issued a Finding of Probable Cause, the Franklin Township Board of Education case will be referred for a process known as Conciliation. If Conciliation is not successful, the matter will be referred for a non-jury trial before an Administrative Law Judge. Once the trial is completed, the presiding Administrative Law Judge will issue a written Initial Decision.

Investigator Alexander Garcon, Camden Office Manager John Beauchamp and Staff Attorney Estelle Bronstein handled the Franklin Township Board of Education matter on behalf of the State.

Frequently Asked Questions about Bullying

Are name-calling and teasing forms of bullying?

Applying the definition of bullying behavior, name-calling and teasing are included as “attempts to inflict physical and/or psychological distress.” Though perhaps not as obviously painful as physical bullying, name-calling and teasing can be just as harmful when they result from an “imbalance of power” between the bully and the victim. For example, children’s name-calling with terms such as “queer” or “fag” is definitely a form of bias-based bullying.

How can we stop bullying on the playground?

Bullying intervention should be seen as one part of a systemic preventionintervention-protection (PIP) approach. The entire school COMMUNITY must be included. Teachers, students, administrators and parents are part of the school community. Stopping bullying in any environment, whether on the playground, in the classroom, or in the hallway requires that:

1. Student bystanders and victims feel empowered to report the situation to adults, understanding the difference between:

• “tattling” to harm someone and
• “telling” to protect someone (or yourself).

2. And that adults will respond by:

• stopping the bullying behavior immediately (intervention)
• providing consistent consequences for the students behaving as bullies
• including disciplinary consequences and reports to parents
• protecting/supporting the victim

How can we empower children who are being bullied?

The experience of being bullied may have long-term consequences, depending on the duration, the level of bullying violence, and how it is related to the victim’s identity,. A victim is empowered by a shift in the school community’s norms which make totally clear that bullying is not permitted, that every person has a right to feel safe, that everyone has a responsibility to help others feel safe. Providing victims with the chance to tell their stories and ask their questions is also empowering. Assuring that victims know they are not alone also empowers children who are being bullied.

How can we help children who are behaving as bullies, especially when their parents may be reinforcing bullying behavior?

Not all children who behave as bullies are alike. Some are acting from more deep-seated emotional problems, while others are experimenting with limits and/or enjoying the feeling of “power over” others. Some victims may act aggressively and appear to be bullies themselves. Clearly parents need to be informed of their child’s bullying behavior. While they may be in denial or may defend their child, parents respond more positively to a concern for their child than to an accusation or an implied condemnation. Parents also need to understand that the long-term consequences for children behaving as bullies can be very serious. Research shows that about 1/4 of children identified as bullies in elementary school have a criminal record by age 25-30 (depending on the study). Often, parents are defending themselves (and their parenting skills) when they act defensively about their children.

This message has been brought to you by the New Jersey Criminal Defense Attorneys at Garces & Grabler, P.C.

New Jersey DWI – Confrontation Clause

What is a Confrontation Clause?

The Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that “in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right…to be confronted with the witnesses against him.”

The right only applies to criminal prosecutions, not civil cases or other proceedings.

In the recent New Jersey DWI case of State v. Rehmann, the municipal court judge rejected the defendant’s claim of a violation of the Confrontation Clause and found the defendant guilty of DWI. At the trial, Mr. Maxwell, the witness called to testify about the defendant’s Blood Alcohol Content (BAC), was not the person who had performed the actual testing, but had observed another chemist, Major Mitchell, examine the defendant’s blood sample, using a gas chromatograph. Major Mitchell was being retrained at that time, and required supervision; Mr. Maxwell signed the laboratory report, certifying the accuracy of the testing.

To satisfy the Confrontation Clause, the state must provide a witness who has made an independent determination as to laboratory tests or other scientific results offered. In this case, Mr. Maxwell satisfied this provision.

This information has been brought to you by the New Jersey Drunk Driving Lawyers at Garces & Grabler, P.C.

Contact a New Jersey Drunk Driving Lawyer

Drunk Driving FAQs

New Jersey Commercial Drivers License DWI

State v. Gerald Nunnally

On May 4, 2011, The Appellate Decision agreed with a Law Division ruling that for a commercial driver to be convicted of Refusing to submit to a breath test, that CDL driver must be charged under the relevant CDL Refusal statute, as opposed to the general refusal statute applicable to customary driving privileges.

As commercial drivers are professionally trained to operate heavy and more dangerous equipment, so too they bear the burden of more severe consequences when convicted of a DWI offense.

The initial difference between the relevant statutes lies in the Blood Alcohol Content level that creates a presumption of guilt if admitted into evidence against a defendant.  While the customary allowable BAC limit is below .08, commercial drivers must maintain a BAC of under .04.

Furthermore, both a conviction and/or a Refusal culminate in extensively longer periods of a suspension of driving privileges, including a PERMANENT loss of a CDL on a 2d offense DWI conviction.  For a CDL, loss of license equates to loss of a vested career.

The importance of this recent decision is that the Court now fully describes these enhancements, and determines that fairness should prevent the State from merely utilizing the customary Refusal warnings.  These warnings may not include a full advisory of the consequences to a CDL suspect.

The DWI and Refusal statutes for CDLs are not merely lesser included offenses of the customary DWI and Refusal statutes, and should not be relegated as such.

NJ DWI Lawyer
Jonathan A. Kessous, Esq.
Of the law firm of  Garces & Grabler,  P.C.