How JustAnswer Works:

  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.

Ask AlexiaEsq. Your Own Question

AlexiaEsq.
AlexiaEsq., Managing Attorney
Category: Criminal Law
Satisfied Customers: 11698
Experience:  19+ Years of Legal Practice in Criminal Law.
Type Your Criminal Law Question Here...
AlexiaEsq. is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

IN NJ MUNICIPAL COURT IS THE DEFENSE LEGALLY OBLIGATED TO TELL

Customer Question

IN NJ MUNICIPAL COURT IS THE DEFENSE LEGALLY OBLIGATED TO TELL THE PROSECUTOR AND OR THE JUDGE WHAT DEFENSES WILL BE BROUGHT UP AT TRIAL?
Submitted: 5 years ago.
Category: Criminal Law
Expert:  lwpat replied 5 years ago.
Not unless you are served with discovey.
Customer: replied 5 years ago.
nj does not have automatic mutual discovery?, ... that is if a defense asks for discovery , it is legally thought the defense must provide information about the defense? what is taking so long? why is it a first offense, no accident, lowest tier level, 0,08 b ac, routine traffic stop, no video tape, is now going into its 22nd couyrt appearance over 44 months, without one hearing on the evidence ever taking place?
Expert:  lwpat replied 5 years ago.

The longer it takes the better off you are. The officer may resign or move to a new department. The older a case is the better the likelyhood they will reduce in order to get it off the docket. For a DUI you really need an attorney due to the penalties that will follow a conviction.

 

If they want discover they have to ask.

Customer: replied 5 years ago.
intresting, that doesnt help me at all, ..... somehow , eventually i am going to have to say my attorney didnt make the arguements, ...... i wish , i want, the state to request discovery, otherwise my asttorney is off the hook, rightr, ..... they he can just say, oh well, i did my best, XXXXX XXXXX is messed up, ....... almost 4 years now, going to court in a suitr and tie, 22 times, are you kidding me, not one heariong on the evidence ever taking place, not ever miranda hearin g?
Expert:  lwpat replied 5 years ago.
If you have been to court 22 times your attorney needs to be requesting a dismissal.
Customer: replied 5 years ago.
abnd if he doesnt, what recourse do i have? suing my attorney?
Expert:  lwpat replied 5 years ago.
You can always hire another attorney.
Customer: replied 5 years ago.
real.ly? gee, didnt know i was so rich........ the delay have caused 3 years of unemployment for me, in the middle of my life and my carreer..... because after i lost my job for depression from the asrrest, i sxpent my time waiting, thinking every 6-10 weeks, on the upcoming appearance, the case would be over, ..... we it is 44 months later with the 22nd appearance coming up, ..... this is total indescrible bull crap, ... especially since the nj supreme court specifically ordered my case to proceed to trial on jan 10, 2006,.... and the municipal court disobeyed the order, delaying over 92 cases, cause they didsagreed weith it, and proceeded to trial in none of the alcotest cases, .....
Expert:  N Cal Attorney replied 5 years ago.
It sounds like you can file a motion to dismiss based on violation of your right to a speedy trial. If you can no longer afford your attorney you can ask the Court to appoint an attorney to assist you.
Customer: replied 5 years ago.

LOL, YOU GOT TO BRE KIDDING ME, A POLIITICAL LACKEY THAT ANSWERS TO HIS FATHER AND THE JUDGE , LOLOLOLOLOLOL, ARE YOU FASMILIAR AT ALL WITH NJ MUNICIPAL COURTROOMS?

......]

 

HERE IS MY DRAFT ON MY FEDERAL FILING, JUST THE DRAFT, MORE TO COMRE

 

In The
United States District Court
District of New Jersey


Statement of the Case

Petitioner is currently in NJ Municipal Court for State DUI violation. Petitioner is unable to defend himself in any pending criminal proceeding or civil litigation until a declaration of his rights to Due Process and Speedy Trial is made.

Jurisdiction

1. Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to :

2. 28 U.S.C. § 1331, the general federal question statute

3. 28 U.S.C. § 2201 , the federal declaratory relief statute, to declare the rights of parties

4. 28 U.S.C. § 2201 , the federal injunctive relief statute

Identification of Parties

.
Petitioner


5.James Gillette is a private citizen with a residence of

Respondant[s]


6.Judge Weber is a Municipal Court Judge in Old Bridge Township New Jersey, with a business address of

7. W. Lane Miller is a Municipal Court Prosecutor in Old Bridge Township New Jersey, with a business address of

8. Judge Toth is a MunicipalCourt Judge in the City of Perth Amboy,

9. Alan Papp is a Municipal Court Prosecutor in the City of Perth Amboy

10. Defendant XXXXX XXXXX is the acting administrator of NJ Courts, with a business address of


Statement of Facts

11. Petitioner James Gillette was summonsed into Municipal Court in Old Bridge and Perth Amboy 21 times, over 1294 days, continuing to date, since being charged with the violation of NJ 39:-4-50 on September 17, 2005.

12. The New Jersey Supreme Court issued an Order to all New Jersey Municipal Courts on Jan 10 , 2006 ordering the prosecution to proceed to trial. See Exhibit A.

13 In Violation to that Order, to date both defendant judges stand in absolute violation of the previously cited NJ Supreme Court Order and refuse absolutely to schedule a trial on petitioners DUI charge, in violation of NJ and Federal Law.

14. Respondent's right to a speedy trial in New Jersey Law has been ignored; it appears the law and Respondent's rights are mere suggestions in the hands of these New Jersey Court bureaucrats.

15. It is black letter law, in both New Jersey State Law and Federal Law that the State of New Jersey must obey its own statutes and rules.

16. Judge Weber stated on record everyone has to wait, so do I, in direct violation of the New Jersey Supreme Court Order

17. The actions of the respondents in this petition hopefully will so shock the conscious of this Federal Court that it will immediately declare these NJ Judges to be in violation of New Jersey Law and to injoin them from the deleterious conduct they have visited upon petitioner and / or any other person within there grasp.


Legal Claims / Causes of Action

18. Is it a violation of my rights under the Federal and NJ constitution to be denied a trial in NJ in violation of the New Jersey Supreme Court Order?

19. Does Old Bridge Township Municipal Court have to obey New Jersey Supreme Orders directed to it?

20. At the rate NJ is moving, I will be tried on my 104th birthday. Is that process lawful?

21. Is it lawful for a Municpal Court Judge to deny defandants a trial bvecause he disagreed with a New Jersey Supreme Court Order to proceed to trial?

22.


Relief Requested
Mr. Gillette requests a declaration of rights concerning the right that the NJ Supreme Court Order of January 10, 2006 needed to be obeyed. And a permanent injunction against the State of New Jersey in their pursuit of a prosecution in the DUI case against him.


i need to get 2 things

third circuit US DISTRICT COURT NJ

 

Expert:  N Cal Attorney replied 5 years ago.
The federal court may decline to hear this case because of the Younger abstension doctrine.
http://w3.uchastings.edu/leeet_01/FederalCourts/FC_Class_29.htm states:

YOUNGER ABSTENTION

a. Rule: A federal court may not enjoin a pending state prosecution in the absence of bad faith, harassment, or other extraordinary circumstances

I would file a motion to dismiss for violating your right to a speedy trial and if the trial court denies the motion I would file for a writ of mandate in the state court of appeal.

There is a chance the federal court will hear the case because it sounds like bad faith and harassment, but the federal court is not required to hear the case. The court in which the case is pending has to hear a motion to dismiss.

Customer: replied 5 years ago.

I HAVE THE RIGHT TO FILE A FEDERAL LAW SUIT, ASKING THE FEDERALCOURT A GENERAL QUESTION UNDER TITLE 28-----28 U.S.C. § 1331, NO? IF THEY SAY THEY WONT HEAR IT BECAUSE OF BAD FAITRH, IT IS CERTAINLY BASED ON BAD FAITH OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, AND THAT IN OF ITSELF IS A PERVERBIAL INDICTMENT AGAINST NEW JERSEY , NO?

 

 

Expert:  N Cal Attorney replied 5 years ago.
Sorry, what the Younger doctrine says is that the federal court can hear the case if the state of NJ is acting in bad faith.

You can read the opinion in Younger at http://supreme.justia.com/us/401/37/case.html

The syllabus states: Federal courts will not enjoin pending state criminal prosecutions except under extraordinary circumstances where the danger of irreparable loss is both great and immediate
Customer: replied 5 years ago.
EXACTLY MY POINT, WHAT MOR BAD FAITH CAN THERE BE THEN TO IGNORE A NJ SUPREME COURTT ORDER TO PORCEED TO TRIAL, AN ORDER THE WAS IN EXISTANCE FROM JAN 10, 2006 TOMARH 217, B EFORE IT BECAME MOOT, N...... WHAT PLANET DO YOU LIVER ON?, WHAT COUNTRY DO YO LIVER IN?.... THE TITLE 28 SECTION 22012 QANS 22OE IS DESIGNED TO HANDLE SITUATIONS WHERE THE STATE COURT/THE MUNICIPALCOPURT HAS f**kED UOP SO BADLY, AND REFUSES TO GIVE A DEFENDANT EVEN ONE HEARING, ,LET ALONE A TRIAL , THROUGH 44 MONTHS, DESPITDS A COURTB ORDER FROM THE NJ SUPREME COURT TO DO SO, ....
Expert:  N Cal Attorney replied 5 years ago.
The fastest solution is to file a motion to dismiss in state court.
Customer: replied 5 years ago.
BAD FAITH, READ ABOVE TOO, LOLOLOLOL, WHSAT ARE YOU KIDDING ME, THE JUDGE OBSTRUCTED JUSDTICE IN EVERY ALCTREST CASE BEFOR HIM, 932 CVASES IN NOLD BRIDGE , AND WHO KNOWS HOW MANY IN SAYRIVILEE, ..... THIS IS RACKETEERRING MY FRIEND, . IT IS A FEDERAL CRIME
Expert:  N Cal Attorney replied 5 years ago.
http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/acjc/index.htm is the website for the NJ Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct

You can file a complaint with that body if you believe a judge has been obstructing justice, and it sounds like he has. But that will not resolve the charges against you the way a motion dismiss could.
Customer: replied 5 years ago.
YEAH, I KNOW, THAT IS AN OPTION, BUT THEY JUDGECWEBER AND PROSECUTOR W LSNE MILLER I OLD BRIFGE TOWNSHIP HAVE COMMITTED FDERA CRIMES, . AND SINCE I CAN NOT EVBEN GET A HEARING THRIOUGH 44 MONTHS AND 22 APPEARANCS IUN A STYATE COURT,. WHAT RERASINSON DO I HAVE TO BELIEVE I CASN GET JUSTICE IN A HIGHER STATE COURT, WITHOUT FIRST A RULING ON MY RIGHTS BY A FEDERALO COURT, ..... ALL THE LAW GURUS ARE TELLING ME TO FIRST GET A FEDERAL COURT RULING, THAT MY RIGFHTS WERE VIOLATED, THEN I CAN NOT ONLY GOP SFTER THE JUDGER, BUT HIS KIDS HAMPSTERA ANDS AHIS GRANDCHILDRENS LEGOS,,.... NO?
Expert:  N Cal Attorney replied 5 years ago.
Judges have almost total immunity from suit for their judicial acts, even if they make illegal rulings.
Customer: replied 5 years ago.
BUT NO RULING WAS MADE BY THE JUDGE, HE ENTERED INTO A CONSPIRACY TO OBSTRUCT JUSTICE, DID OBSTRUCT JUSTICE, AND DID ACT IN CONTEMPT OF COURT, NOT ONE TIME, NOT A FEW TIMES, UP TO 92 TIMES IN 26 MONTHS, HE DOESNTR HA VE IMMUNITY TO DO THAT, .....IT WASNT A JUDICIAL DECISION TO CONTEMPT A COURT ORDER, IT WAS ACEECSION MADE BECAUSE HE DIDNT WANT TO BE BOTHER WITH 92 POST CONVICXTION RELIEF CASES AFTER CHUN, BOO HOO HOO, THE NJ SUPREME COURT ORDERED HIM WHAT TO DO
Expert:  N Cal Attorney replied 5 years ago.
Is this the order you referred to, at the end of the opinion at http://www.jdsupra.com/post/documentViewer.aspx?fid=94c29d88-62a1-4188-84c7-f6d6e3e834a4
Customer: replied 5 years ago.

the order i refer to was issued on january 10, 2006, by the new jersey supreme court, issued to every municipal court and superior court in nj, and stood in place until it became moot with the final decision in chun, on march 17, 2008.

the order ordered the prosectuioon to proceed to trial.

here is the order ::::

 

NJ SUPREME COURT ORDER OF JANUARY 10, 2006

 

SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY
September Term 2005
58,879

 

STATE OF NEW JERSEY,
Plaintiff-Appellant,

v. O R D E R

 

JANE H. CHUN, et al.,
Defendants-Respondents.

 

The Court having previously certified the within matter directly pursuant to Rule 2:12-1 and having contemporaneously appointed retired Appellate Division Presiding Judge Michael XXXXX XXXXX as Special Master,
And the Court having remanded the matter to Judge King to develop a record, conduct hearings, and report his findings and conclusions on an accelerated basis,
And the Court having concluded that it should expand on its prior Order by addressing issues that affect the prosecution of N.J.S.A. 39:4-50 offenses statewide,
And good cause appearing;
IT IS ORDERED that this Order shall apply to all N.J.S.A. 39:4-50 prosecutions in Municipal Courts and appeals in the Law Division and Appellate Division of Superior Court; and it is further
ORDERED that N.J.S.A. 39:4-50 prosecutions and appeals that do not involve the use of an Alcotest device are to proceed in the normal course; and it is further
ORDERED that the prosecution and appeal of cases involving repeat offenders under the statute shall proceed in the normal course, and sentences imposed on such defendants shall not be stayed unless the conviction is based solely on Alcotest device readings; and it is further
ORDERED that first offender prosecutions involving the use of an Alcotest device shall proceed to trial based on clinical evidence when available, including but not limited to objective observational evidence, as well as the relevant Alcotest readings; and it is further
ORDERED that at the conclusion of each such first offender trial, if the court determines that the defendant is guilty of an N.J.S.A. 39:4-50 offense, it shall include, whenever applicable, an articulation of the alternative bases for that finding when imposing a sentence pursuant to the statute, see State v. Sisti, 209 N.J.Super. 148, 151 (App.Div. 1986), State v. Kashi, 360 N.J.Super. 538, 544 (App.Div. 2003); and it is furtherORDERED that the execution of sentences imposed on first offenders shall be stayed pending disposition of the within appeal unless the court determines, after considering the severity of the incident and the prior record of the defendant, that the public interest requires the immediate execution of the sentence; and it is further
ORDERED that any and all requests for a reliability hearing in respect of Alcotest devices are stayed pending the filing of the Court's final decision herein, at which time all pending challenges to an Alcotest device's reliability shall be decided consistent with the Court's disposition; and it is further
ORDERED that any and all orders of municipal courts and the Superior Court, including but not limited to the December 12, 2005, orders of Judge Walter R. Barisonek, A.J.S.C., (State v. Casey L. Grogan) and Judge B. Theodore Bozonelis, A.J.S.C. (State v. Michael Dilger, et al.) are vacated to the extent that they conflict with this Court's Order of December 14, 2005, as modified and supplemented by the within Order; and it is further
ORDERED that consistent with the Court's prior reminder in its December 14, 2005, Order that
all Superior Court and Municipal Court judges before whom N.J.S.A. 39:4-50 proceedings are pending, or before whom such proceedings are brought during the pendency of this appeal, must ensure that the Court's Guidelines for Operation of Plea Agreements in the Municipal Courts of New Jersey are strictly enforced,
a defendant who challenges the use of Alcotest-related evidence may enter a conditional guilty plea pursuant to Rule 7:6-2(c), reserving the right to apply for relief from the municipal court should the appeal before the Court result in a determination that the Alcotest devices are not reliable; and it is further
ORDERED that the Acting Administrative Director of the Courts shall circulate this Order forthwith to all judges of the municipal courts and the Superior Court, Law Division and Appellate Division.
WITNESS, the Honorable Deborah T. Poritz, Chief Justice, at Trenton, this 10th day of January, 2006.
/s/ Stephen W. Townsend
Clerk of the Supreme Court
CHIEF JUSTICE PORITZ and ASSOCIATE JUSTICES LONG, LaVECCHIA, ZAZZALI, ALBIN, WALLACE, and RIVERA-SOTO join in the Court's Order.

Expert:  AlexiaEsq. replied 5 years ago.
John, did you pose this exact same scenario several weeks ago here?
Customer: replied 5 years ago.

ive been posing this for 2 years. everywhere, no sure where, .. i didn't keep a log of all the places, ..... i have copies of a lot of it, over 5000 pages written in internet blogs, attorney sites, justanswer, emails to my attorneys and other attorneys, to myt state senator, my us congressman, .... and others, .....

the fact is, and will always stand for al.l truth and time, the nj supreme court issued a cxourt order on jan 10, 2006, ordering the cases to proceed to trial, ALL OF THEM!, all the alcotesty cxases, and explained in detail exactly how it should go forth, ..... for a local municipal court judge to ignore that order, and proceed to trial in none, while holding up 92, .... is RACKETEERING, ..... USING A POSITION, THAT IS BY DEFINITION NOT SUPPOSE TO BE POLITICAL, TO USE POLIITICS, TO DESTXXXXX XXXXXVES OF PEOPLE LIKE ME, IN THE OBSTRUCTION, WHERE I HAVE TO SIT HERE, AND NOW HAVE A LIFE, BECAUSE HE DECIDED TO OBSTRUCT A NJ SUPREME COURT ORDER THAT PROTECTED MY RIGHT TO LIVE A LIFE ,...

Expert:  N Cal Attorney replied 5 years ago.
I have told you,
The fastest solution is to file a motion to dismiss in state court.

You can accept that answer or not but I am not here to argue with you and you have nothing to gain by arguing with me or the other experts who have tried to help you.
Customer: replied 5 years ago.
the court wont allow us to file motion to dismiss, or anything else, no hearings are allowed, nothing, and ive told you that before too.
Customer: replied 5 years ago.

being from north carolina. maybe you do not understand how nj courts work for dui, .... and maybe not qualified as an expert on nj dui, or nj courts.

the court wont allow us to file motion to dismiss, or anything else, no hearings are allowed, nothing, and ive told you that before too.

3 appearances ago we tried to file motions to dismiss, and the judge refused to take them into her possession, into the courts possession. then we went to court 2 times after that now, and the judge refused to even take the bench for my case, refusing anything to go on record......this scnerio has been repeating itself in this case for 23 appearances over 44 months --- THERE IS NO RECORD

Expert:  N Cal Attorney replied 5 years ago.
File the motion to dismiss with the Clerk of the Court.
Customer: replied 5 years ago.
HOW WOULD YOU ASSUME I DO THAT, AT GUN POINT?, MY GOD MAN, YOU ARE GIVING ME INSDANE ADV ICE, .....I TOLD YOU , THROUGH 44 MONTHS AND 23 APPEARANCES, AND STILL ONGOING, THE COURT REFUSES TO ACCEPT ANY MOTIONS, WRITTEN OR VEBAL, .... WHAT WOULD YOP HAVE ME DO?
Expert:  N Cal Attorney replied 5 years ago.
File the written motion with the Clerk, not with the judge.
Customer: replied 5 years ago.

and when the clerk tells me to leave or be arrested, whaT SHOULD I DO? THECLERK ISNT GOING TO ACCEPT A WRITTEN MOTION THE JUDGE WON'T ACCEPT, ... ARE YOU INSANE, DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT NJ MUNICIPAL COURTS?

SHE'LL TELL ME, AND HAS TOLD US, TO PRESENT IT TO THE JUDGE IN COURT, .... THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS THE JUDGES REFUSTO ACCEPT ANYTHUING IN COURT,

NOTHING IS ALLOWED ON RECORD, AND NOTHING IS ALLOWED IN WRITTING, AT LEAST IN MY CASE, AND THAT IS A FACT, CAUSE NOTHING IS ON RECORD, ORAL, OR WREITTEN,

AS A WARD OF THE COURT, I CAN SPEAK FREELY AND SAY WHAT HAPPENED, CAUSE NONE OF ITY IS IN MY CONTROL, IN FACT, AS A WARD OF THE COURT, IF I PRESENT MY ATTORNEY WITH A MOTION TO DISMISS, IT IS THE SAME AS PRESENTING IT TO THE COURT, NO?

 

Expert:  N Cal Attorney replied 5 years ago.
No, but your attorney will know how to get the motion filed.
Expert:  AlexiaEsq. replied 5 years ago.
My thoughts are, perhaps you failed to pay the filing fee, ergo the court chose not to accept your Motion. One of the pitfalls.
Customer: replied 5 years ago.

FILING FEE? LOL, nj courts rules clearly state motions must be made orally in court, unless otherwise instructed by the court. The first court did instrcut us to do so after making oral motion to dismiss, ..... there is no filing fee. oTHER THAN THAT, THE JUDGES IN BOTH COURTS HAVE REFUSED TO TAKE THE BENCH IN MY CASE.

cLEARLY SOMETHING IS WRONG AFTEWR 45 MONTHS AND 23 APPEARANCES, TO NEVER HAVE A HEARING ON THE EVIDENCE, IN A FIRST OFFENSE, LOWEST TIER LEVEL, NO ACCIDENT, ROUTINE TRAFFIC STOP DUI, .... WHERE THERE WERE NO PROBLEMS SUCH AS MY GIVING THE OFFICER PROBLEMS, OR THE OFFICER GIVING ME PROBLEMS. SO WHAT IS WRONG, IS SOMETHING I WOULD LOVE TO FIND OUT.

 

Expert:  AlexiaEsq. replied 5 years ago.

Oops, did you fail to file an interlocutory appeal? While there ARE filing fees, although there may be hardship methods of waiving them. We all agree I think that nearly 4 years it too long, (even though we may not agree with you other legal assessments) but you really need to appeal instead of working with a dead court that is chasing its own tail. Get it to a different court, appeal. (I didn't read all of your posts, as I really don't even have the time to have fun here, as I have get back to paying work if bills are to be paid, but seriously, file the appropriate request, use an attorney if you find you are not able to successfully file these things, and move on, you've got the rest of your life to live.

Customer: replied 5 years ago.

i have had an attorney the entire time, the first attorney, matthew resig for 11 appearances for the first 26 months, and a 2nd attorney after reisig , hired within 2 weeks of him opting out of the case, for an additional 12 appearances over the next 19 months....

14 appearances were made in one municipal court for 33 months, 9 appearances in a 2nd municipal court for another 11 months, one month kinda overlapped.

 

There is no filing fee to make a mothing in front of the bench in municipal court,...... is there? what are you talking about?,... in all of my research and dealings with this situation, i never heard of a defense attorney having to pay the court money to raise a legal issue in municipal court.

 

is this true, and if so, why was i never advised?

Expert:  AlexiaEsq. replied 5 years ago.
An interlocutory appeal is not a motion, nor an appeal of right (like it would be if there was a conviction) but one you should be able to request while the case is pending, due to a belief that the lower court made a ruling on one of your motions that was wrong. They are not made, like a motion, to the very court that is screwing around with you, but to a higher court. It is a whole other ball game, but my thought is that since you can't even GET to a final adjudication after all this time, maybe such an appeal is in order and I'm a bit surprised you haven't finally sought same. Although it is not clear to me why your case has been adjourned so many times, and who sought the adjournment (defense attorney or prosecution, or even the court itself), if it wasn't your side that did so, the length of this is rather crazy. If it had nothing to do with the defense, I would be seeking another form of a redress, such as the IA noted above. Perhaps even consult with a civil rights attorney, given the length of time and potential violation of a right to a speedy trial (unless you waived same, of course.)
Customer: replied 5 years ago.

The first paret what you said doesnt apply, ... i am arguing, the nj supreme court ordered all the cxases to proceed to trial on jan 10, 2006, pending chun, so that point is moot, unless you want to involve the defense attorys in obstruction of justice and contempt of a court order. do you?

The 2nd part , read the portion of the post somewhat way above in this threat, the federalo lawsuit under us title 28, section 2201 and 2202, ......

 

anyone in this situation can bring a 2201 lawsuit in us district court, for the decalaration of rights of all parties, and whatever that court finds would be binding to any other court, ever if a rememdey of further ligitgation is not saught, right?

 

you think this is an easy type of law suit to bring pro se?

 

 

Expert:  AlexiaEsq. replied 5 years ago.

Dear XXXXX, we have gone through this in other post(s) of yours, so feel free to refer. I can't spend time donating here, so this will be my last post, but as for your first ?, if I thought the defense attorneys were obstructing justice or committing malpractice, yes, I would involved them. But that is just me.

 

I do believe we discussed 2201 before, so please refer to that if we did, as I care not to re-research it.

 

And no I don't think it is easy pro se, it is not even easy for lawyers, as you have learned from yours. It is one of my major gripes with the system, the taxpayers pay for it but they can't use it unless they are wealthy and can afford to pay by the hour a highly educated lawyer, which means hefty hourly fees (to pay for that education, which is not cheap). My point being, the legal system should be usable by ALL, at least of average intelligence, no attorneys needed. I realize this is contrary to the interests of lawyers, but it is how I see it. So in that regard, I am sorry for your plight, it should not be this way.

 

Good luck.

Customer: replied 5 years ago.

HEY, I THINK, AND HAVE ALWAYS SAID, THE BURDEN TO BRING A HEARING AND TRIAL, IS FIRST ON THE sTATE, 2ND ON THE COURT, ...... ONLY 3RD AND FAR THIRDCB EHIND IS THE DEFENSE, ..... AS THE NJ SUPREME COURT ISSUED A DIRECT AND CLEWAR COURT ORDER, ON JAn 10, 2006 "proceed to trial" , obviously this is on the state and the court, ........

I have always been a ward of the court in my case, because i have always had an attorney, .. so that brings it into play a liottle, .. bvut far behind the first play, that the state and court were ordered to proceed to trial, and failed to do so, ....

as far as hourly go, omg, when you pay an attorney 4500 dollars up front and he doews zero in 26 months, then askes off the case, and you pay a 2nd attorney another 3500, and send him 15 drafts of a 30 plus page motion to dismiss over a year, and he does nothing, .... at what point is everyone culpable? i dont know, but clearly culpibility is against the state abndf court for notr obeying a clear and direct nj supreme court order, "proceed to trial"

Expert:  AlexiaEsq. replied 5 years ago.

As you know from prior posts, you and I have a different perspective on Chun and related dictates.

 

Good luck.

Customer: replied 5 years ago.
i know no such thing, ....... i do know for a fact, the nj supreme court issued a clear and direct court order on jan 10, 2006, ordering the cases to proceed to trial, game set match on that, ......... now you want to say you yourself worked with weith prosecutiors and judges to disregard a court order, then read your p-ost above the last one, . you arte advocating you yourself should be held responsioble on the obstruction pof justice, ....
Customer: replied 5 years ago.

you read the below court order, issuede by the new jersey supreme court on january 10, 2006, stood in lioght as is, til march 17 2008, when the order became moot in the final decision in chun, rtead my take on eacvh paragraph in bold, then tell me how any other take cxould come out, ok?, the nj supreme court ordered the cases to proceed, they never overed ruled the order , and it stoood for the entire liofe of it, ... which is to my adsv antage, because it is moot, and thus stood for its ebntire life, now you tell me, omk?

NJ SUPREME COURT ORDER OF JANUARY 10, 2006


SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY
September Term 2005
58,879


STATE OF NEW JERSEY,

Plaintiff-Appellant,


v. O R D E R


JANE H. CHUN, et al.,

Defendants-Respondents.


The Court having previously certified the within matter directly pursuant to Rule 2:12-1 and having contemporaneously appointed retired Appellate Division Presiding Judge Michael XXXXX XXXXX as Special Master,
And the Court having remanded the matter to Judge King to develop a record, conduct hearings, and report his findings and conclusions on an accelerated basis,
And the Court having concluded that it should expand on its prior Order by addressing issues that affect the prosecution of N.J.S.A. 39:4-50 offenses statewide,
And good cause appearing;
IT IS ORDERED that this Order shall apply to all N.J.S.A. 39:4-50 prosecutions in Municipal Courts and appeals in the Law Division and Appellate Division of Superior Court; and it is further



The first part above is clearly saying that what they are going to order below needs to be applied to all dui in nj, from this date forward, jan 10, 2006, until the order is vacated, and it was on march 17, 2008



ORDERED that N.J.S.A. 39:4-50 prosecutions and appeals that do not involve the use of an Alcotest device are to proceed in the normal course;



this should be no problem to anyone, no special order is given within this order that would affect these cases of non alcotest




and it is further
ORDERED that the prosecution and appeal of cases involving repeat offenders under the statute shall proceed in the normal course, and sentences imposed on such defendants shall not be stayed unless the conviction is based solely on Alcotest device readings; and it is further



Here we see the first indication the nj supreme court fully expected the bac from the alcotest to be submitted into evidence at a trial. how can convictions be made based on the alcotest, unless it is submitted into evidence?so of course, it needed to be submitted . now, here it is ordered to proceed in normal course, meaning no stay, ... but lets read further down.






ORDERED that first offender prosecutions involving the use of an Alcotest device shall proceed to trial based on clinical evidence when available, including but not limited to objective observational evidence, as well as the relevant Alcotest readings; and it is further



Here the nj supreme court is explicity ordering the cases for first offenders to proceed to trial, taking out the "normal course" language used above, here in this part of the order, they are ORDERING THE PROSECUTION TO PROCEED TO TRIAL. so now not only are stays not allowed, they should even be proceeding in normal course, thee cases should be proceeding to trial, to anyone who understands language, this clearly means get on your horse and do it, trial these cases, and not in normal course, but right now! And it is clearly saying to use observations and the bac from the alcoterst, relevant bac, meaning anything 0.08 or above.





ORDERED that at the conclusion of each such first offender trial, if the court determines that the defendant is guilty of an N.J.S.A. 39:4-50 offense, it shall include, whenever applicable, an articulation of the alternative bases for that finding when imposing a sentence pursuant to the statute, see State v. Sisti, 209 N.J.Super. 148, 151 (App.Div. 1986), State v. Kashi, 360 N.J.Super. 538, 544 (App.Div. 2003);



Here the court is again indicating that the trials needed to occur under this court order, with the bac, as decribed in the previous section, and how to make a sentence, if possible, but does not have to be alrternative finding of guilt, ... lets read futher.




and it is furtherORDERED that the execution of sentences imposed on first offenders shall be stayed pending disposition of the within appeal unless the court determines, after considering the severity of the incident and the prior record of the defendant, that the public interest requires the immediate execution of the sentence;



Here the court is clearly saying that first offenders, even if the guilty finding , after a trial, is found to be based solely on the bac, that sentence did not have to be stayed, this part of executing sentence at this point was totally up to the trial judge, at his discretion.




and it is further
ORDERED that any and all requests for a reliability hearing in respect of Alcotest devices are stayed pending the filing of the Court's final decision herein, at which time all pending challenges to an Alcotest device's reliability shall be decided consistent with the Court's disposition;



So here the court is saying, in all the above sections, to proceed to trial, enter the bac into evidence, try to find another reason for guilt, but the defense is not allowed to challange the bac on reliability. this is a clear court order, and it does not matter if it is unconstitutional, wrong, or that no one agrees with it, ... i believe there are sound legal reasons for this, and i stand firmly with the nj supreme court . i believe there are public saftey issues too, and due process issues . people needed trials, and lets read below the rememdey...






and it is further
ORDERED that any and all orders of municipal courts and the Superior Court, including but not limited to the December 12, 2005, orders of Judge Walter R. Barisonek, A.J.S.C., (State v. Casey L. Grogan) and Judge B. Theodore Bozonelis, A.J.S.C. (State v. Michael Dilger, et al.) are vacated to the extent that they conflict with this Court's Order of December 14, 2005, as modified and supplemented by the within Order;



HERE THE NJ SUPREME COURT IS SAYING, LISTEN, NO MORE STAYS ON TRIALS, LETS MOVE ON THESE CASES NOW, ANY STAY IMPOSED BY THE MIDDLESEX COUNTY JUDGE IS VACATED, AND NO MUNCIPAL COURT JUDGE CAN PUT A STAY ON TRIALS. THEY ARE MAKING THIS EXTREMELY CLEAR HERE, ANY STAY IMPOSED BY ANY MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE WOULD BE IN CONFLICT OF THIS ORDER, SO WHEN JUDGE WEBER ADMITTED ON RECORD IN MY HEARING TO DISMISS THAT EVERYONE HAD TO WAIT, SO DO YOU, IS AN ADMISSION THAT HE, WEBER, IS IN CONFLICT WITH THIS COURT ORDER, IN VIOLATION OF MY DUE PROCESS RIGHTS! LETS READ BELOW




and it is further
ORDERED that consistent with the Court's prior reminder in its December 14, 2005, Order that
all Superior Court and Municipal Court judges before whom N.J.S.A. 39:4-50 proceedings are pending, or before whom such proceedings are brought during the pendency of this appeal, must ensure that the Court's Guidelines for Operation of Plea Agreements in the Municipal Courts of New Jersey are strictly enforced,



NO PLEA DEALS ALLOWED. CLEAR ENOUGH. BUT MY FIRST ATTORNEY TOLD ME THAT JUDGE WEBER HIMSELF WAS GOING TO WRITE A PLEA DEAL IN MY CASE, ACTUALLY WRITE IT ON PAPER, SIGN IT, AND HAND IT TO US FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. I THOUGHT THIS WAS COMPLETE BULLCRAP, AND IN VIOLATION OF MY DUE PROCESS RIGHTS.




a defendant who challenges the use of Alcotest-related evidence may enter a conditional guilty plea pursuant to Rule 7:6-2(c), reserving the right to apply for relief from the municipal court should the appeal before the Court result in a determination that the Alcotest devices are not reliable;



haere thery are saying one may put in a conditional guilty plea, and wait for chun, however it does not adress straight out not guilty pleas, which of course, any defendant could re open for post conviction relief at any time, .. in other words, this section of the order was the proper "out" for the courts, state, and defense attorneys, who couldnt be bothered actually holding trials, ... however, under representation, a person pleading straight out, not guilty, then the order of events goes to the top of this order, and works its way down in due course- proceed to tyrial, enter a bac result, due process occurs as this order sees fit, money paid for a defense is worth spent, as a defense and cross examination is brought to the stop and field sobriety tests, and the sentence may still be stayed, pending chun, .. so here it is clear, they all had an out, it is not my fault i didnt allow thewm to take it, i pleaded and continue to this day to plead in court not guilty, throughXXXXXappearances over 1294 days, without one hearing ever taking place on the charges against me




and it is further
ORDERED that the Acting Administrative Director of the Courts shall circulate this Order forthwith to all judges of the municipal courts and the Superior Court, Law Division and Appellate Division.



Here the nj supreme court ordered that this order in its entireity be sent to every municipal court in nj. someone violated my rights, and maybe through the federal 2201 general question, i will be allowed to file interogatories, and find out who actually violated my right and how it came to be this way,.. not "why" mind you, but "how", because why goes to motive, i and although of course emotionally i want to know why, i know intelectually, i can only ask how




WITNESS, the Honorable Deborah T. Poritz, Chief Justice, at Trenton, this 10th day of January, 2006.

/s/ Stephen W. Townsend
Clerk of the Supreme Court

CHIEF JUSTICE PORITZ and ASSOCIATE JUSTICES LONG, LaVECCHIA, ZAZZALI, ALBIN, WALLACE, and RIVERA-SOTO join in the Court's Order.

JustAnswer in the News:

 
 
 
Ask-a-doc Web sites: If you've got a quick question, you can try to get an answer from sites that say they have various specialists on hand to give quick answers... Justanswer.com.
JustAnswer.com...has seen a spike since October in legal questions from readers about layoffs, unemployment and severance.
Web sites like justanswer.com/legal
...leave nothing to chance.
Traffic on JustAnswer rose 14 percent...and had nearly 400,000 page views in 30 days...inquiries related to stress, high blood pressure, drinking and heart pain jumped 33 percent.
Tory Johnson, GMA Workplace Contributor, discusses work-from-home jobs, such as JustAnswer in which verified Experts answer people’s questions.
I will tell you that...the things you have to go through to be an Expert are quite rigorous.
 
 
 

What Customers are Saying:

 
 
 
  • Your Expert advise has provided insight on a difficult situation. Thank you so much for the prompt response. I will definitely recommend your website to my friends. Norma Pensacola, FL
< Last | Next >
  • Your Expert advise has provided insight on a difficult situation. Thank you so much for the prompt response. I will definitely recommend your website to my friends. Norma Pensacola, FL
  • Mr. Kaplun clearly had an exceptional understanding of the issue and was able to explain it concisely. I would recommend JustAnswer to anyone. Great service that lives up to its promises! Gary B. Edmond, OK
  • My Expert was fast and seemed to have the answer to my taser question at the tips of her fingers. Communication was excellent. I left feeling confident in her answer. Eric Redwood City, CA
  • I am very pleased with JustAnswer as a place to go for divorce or criminal law knowledge and insight. Michael Wichita, KS
  • PaulMJD helped me with questions I had regarding an urgent legal matter. His answers were excellent. Three H. Houston, TX
  • Anne was extremely helpful. Her information put me in the right direction for action that kept me legal, possible saving me a ton of money in the future. Thank you again, Anne!! Elaine Atlanta, GA
  • It worked great. I had the facts and I presented them to my ex-landlord and she folded and returned my deposit. The 50 bucks I spent with you solved my problem. Tony Apopka, FL
 
 
 

Meet The Experts:

 
 
 
  • Fran L.

    JustAnswer Criminal Law Mentor

    Satisfied Customers:

    8061
    18 yrs of NYC public defense. Extensive arraignment, hearing, trial experience.
< Last | Next >
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/RE/retiredlawyer/2012-6-6_19326_franL.64x64.jpg Fran L.'s Avatar

    Fran L.

    JustAnswer Criminal Law Mentor

    Satisfied Customers:

    8061
    18 yrs of NYC public defense. Extensive arraignment, hearing, trial experience.
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/RA/ratioscripta/2012-6-13_2955_foto3.64x64.jpg Ely's Avatar

    Ely

    Counselor at Law

    Satisfied Customers:

    2079
    Private practice with focus on family, criminal, PI, consumer protection, and business consultation.
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/NA/nathanmoorelaw/2011-5-31_21375_headshotbig.64x64.jpg Nate's Avatar

    Nate

    Lawyer

    Satisfied Customers:

    1625
    Over 10 years of criminal defense practice.
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/LA/LawTalk/2012-6-6_17379_LawTalk.64x64.JPG LawTalk's Avatar

    LawTalk

    Lawyer

    Satisfied Customers:

    1434
    30 years legal experience
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/PH/philip.simmons/2012-6-7_161915_BIGPhilipSimmons.64x64.jpg P. Simmons's Avatar

    P. Simmons

    Lawyer

    Satisfied Customers:

    1418
    16 yrs. of experience including criminal law.
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/marshadjd/2009-6-1_194320_marshajd.jpg Marsha411JD's Avatar

    Marsha411JD

    Lawyer

    Satisfied Customers:

    1380
    Licensed attorney with 27 yrs. exp. in criminal law
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/RO/RobertJDFL/2012-6-6_175352_7538220120606.64x64.jpg RobertJDFL's Avatar

    RobertJDFL

    Lawyer

    Satisfied Customers:

    1300
    Experienced in multiple areas of the law.