Area municipal courts see a multitude of traffic-related offenses at their sessions. For drivers facing such charges, it is helpful to go in armed with one’s options and some knowledge of the rules of law. JEFF GRANIT staff Many drivers have been there — sitting in court for a traffic violation, awaiting their fate with uncertainty over whether they should have just paid the ticket instead of hoping for a better outcome from the judge.
Depending on the driver and who one asks, N.J.S.A. 39:4-97.2 can give a break to those with traffic offenses by reducing or eliminating points assessed for a given offense. Passed in 2004 and often referred to as the “unsafe driving” law, the statute created an offense for driving in an unsafe manner.
First offenders face a minimum fine of $50 and a maximum of $150. A second offense carries a fine of $100 to $250. In either case, the driver charged with the offense accrues no points to his or her license, but must pay a $250 surcharge to the state. Third or subsequent offenses within five years come with heftier fines, the surcharge and four points added to one’s license.
In recent sessions of the municipal courts in East Brunswick, Englishtown, Middletown and Old Bridge, the unsafe driving offense was used in a multitude of cases, as a result of prosecutors striking plea bargains with defendants for the lesser charge.
But is the unsafe driving offense really a bargain? Only for some, according to John Menzel, chairman of the New Jersey State Bar Association’s Municipal Practice Section.
While acknowledging that the statute has positive aspects (such as moving packed court calendars along more quickly, raising revenue for the state and helping drivers avoid points), he said he often recommends that his clients take the two points instead of pleading down to the unsafe driving offense.
“A low-level speeding ticket with two points will not trigger the insurance increase,” he said, pointing out the mandatory four points that come with a third unsafe driving offense within five years. “There’s a big disincentive not to use the unsafe driving.”
Menzel said even in cases when someone may face an insurance increase, he advises them to speak with their insurance company before pleading down to unsafe driving, because the insurance fees could actually be less than the unsafe driving charge.
Red Bank-based attorney Randolph Wolf said the downgrade to unsafe driving often used in municipal courts makes sense.
“The premise behind it is that insurance companies were truly ripping people off. … because of motor vehicle points,” he said. “It’s a way for the state to make the money instead of the insurance companies making the money.”
Prior to the law being enacted, municipal prosecutors often allowed drivers to plead down to what became a sort of catchall offense — driving during a declared state of emergency, according to Menzel. However, it was considered an abuse of the statute, he said, which prompted the creation of the unsafe driving offense.
Old Bridge Prosecutor W. Lane Miller pointed out that the unsafe driving statute cannot be applied in cases of driving drunk or excessive speeding. Instead, it’s a way to provide some leniency for those with minor offenses.
“Insurance ramifications are dramatic,” he said. “We also try to achieve fairness for people — because most of these people aren’t bad people.”
Wolf said the statute works because it is used at the discretion of the prosecutor and the police officer involved in a given incident. “It’s not a robot system,” he said. “There are people involved in, hopefully, using common sense to administer it.”
Still, Menzel said its administration has flaws, as even some attorneys don’t realize that sometimes it’s better if a client doesn’t plead to the unsafe driving offense, and that the state is collecting what some say is a hefty surcharge.
“Should we be trying to balance the budget on the backs of people who have been charged with relatively minor offenses?” he asked.
Old Bridge Municipal Court Judge James Weber said excessive speeders — who are most often young drivers — get a homework assignment in his courtroom. They must find a roadside memorial for someone who was killed in a traffic accident, and then report to him in writing about what they found there and the feelings it evoked.
“I think it’s … important to have people understand what can happen when you’re driving at excessive speeds,” he said. No matter what the offense, there is a bargaining chip that individuals can use to try to tip the scales in their favor. Attorneys may offer defendants a wealth of knowledge, experience, guidance and then some, Menzel said.
“The biggest leverage that you have on the defense is a willingness to fight the charge,” Menzel said, adding that municipal courts are often geared toward accepting guilty pleas rather than duking it out with lawyers.
Although individuals may represent themselves in court, attorneys bring an edge that is likely to top the efforts of somebody who didn’t study law.
During a court session in Old Bridge last month, Weber told at least three people who had been represented by counsel to thank their attorneys. Those individuals faced penalties including loss of license, points and hefty fines, but left with relatively insignificant damages.
In Englishtown and Middletown, judges dismissed a number of summonses and agreed to plea deals to lesser charges for those who had legal representation.
Choosing the right attorney is key to successfully navigating municipal court.
“Selection is the most important thing a person can do,” Menzel said. “You don’t hire a cardiologist to do your brain surgery.”
Citizens should seek attorneys who specialize in the aspect of law that is relevant to the specific complaint in order to better defend their cases, Menzel said.
But the sense of security forged by retaining counsel often comes at a price that may near or exceed the monetary fines imposed by the court. Attorney fees for municipal matters typically range from $200 to $2,000, Menzel said. Prices vary based on the quality of the lawyer and the severity of the charges.
“The bottom line is that you really should not shop on price,” Menzel added. “Unfortunately, you often get what you pay for. You really have to shop on the background and experience of the attorney you’re looking for.”
Criminal offenses like driving while intoxicated and drug charges demand more work from attorneys, who consequently pass larger bills onto their clients, Menzel said, noting that those charges most frequently warrant the aid of counsel.
For minor traffic violations, the price of an attorney seldom costs more than $1,000, he noted.
Whether one haggles with the prosecutor or hires an attorney, at the end of the day, it all comes down to the judge.
East Brunswick Municipal Court Judge Christine Heitmann made it clear in a Dec. 10 court session that being honest and showing respect for the court could be advantageous to those facing charges, perhaps as advantageous as retaining counsel.
One middle-aged woman who gave a false name to an officer was met with the judge’s sympathy after she tearfully apologized in front of the courtroom. When the woman approached the stand, the policeman who charged her with the offense was coincidentally on courtroom duty, and nodded his thanks when the woman said to him, “I’m sorry, I was wrong.”
Heitmann told the woman that her apology was exceptional, because in the judge’s experience, nearly everyone who was sorry for their crimes followed up their apologies with an excuse, but this woman openly admitted her fault and made no excuse for her wrongdoing. As a result of her remorseful display, the woman was let off with the smallest fine allowable for the offense.
A man in his early 20s, facing charges for driving under the influence, was also met with the judge’s consideration, thanks to his three-piece suit. The judge told the young man that welldressed people are an anomaly in the courtroom nowadays, and in a courtroom full of citizens in street clothes, the young man’s tidy appearance showed that he was respectful of the court’s policies.
For outwardly showing his respect for the court, the young man received the mandatory minimum fines and suspension.
While there is no one-size-fits-all solution for those being called before a judge on traffic or other violations, being prepared and knowing what to expect can make a big difference in the penalties one faces.