Monthly Archives: January 2013

State Bar asks high court to invalidate the new Refusal form

1-6-13: In my brief, just accepted by the NJ Supreme Court  in the case of State v. O’Driscoll, the NJ State Bar asks the state’s high court to invalidate the new current refusal form (promulgated 7/1/12) since it mistakenly informs a subject that the is no mandatory minimum suspension, fine, interlock or IDRC. The whole point of the refusal statute is to make it clear to a defendant that there are harsh and mandatory consequences to a refusal. The failure of the form to accurately convey the consequence of refusing is a fatal flaw, we posit. The current form use of terms like “up to” would lead even a sober subject to conclude that the court has discretion to impose a sentence of no suspension and no fine.

Jeff Gold.