Implied Consent

Back to Topic Index

Miranda Warnings: Refusal to submit to a breath test is justified when licensee is shown to be thoroughly confused by having been read both the standard refusal form and Miranda warnings. Decision: 4 N.J.A.R. 061; Where no confusion in the mind of the licensee is shown, refusal to submit to a breath test is not justified by having been read both Miranda warnings and the standard refusal form. Decision: 4 N.J.A.R. 069

Reasonable Grounds: A police officer lacks reasonable grounds to stop and arrest a licensee when the officer knows that the licensee's erratic driving was caused by, if anything, a substance other than alcohol. Decision: 4 N.J.A.R. 191; An arresting officer lacks reasonable grounds to believe a licensee had been driving or had been in actual physical control of a motor vehicle when the licensee was arrested in a parked car before his key was put in the ignition. Decision: 5 N.J.A.R. 067

Refusal: Where a licensee expressed a willingness to submit to a breathalyzer test but subsequently lost consciousness, the licensee never indicated a revocation of his original intent to take the test and thus had not willingly refused to take the breathalyzer test. Decision: 2 N.J.A.R. 408; Licensee's testimony that he was upset but did indeed blow into the breathalyzer machine, coupled with evidence that the machine registered at least one adequate breath sample supported a conclusion that the licensee did not refuse to submit to a breath test. Decision: 2 N.J.A.R. 064; A licensee's deep sleep, induced by his inebriated state, which prevented him from hearing a request to take a breath test will not excuse a refusal to take the test, since to do so would subvert the intent of the breath test refusal statute. Decision: 3 N.J.A.R. 188; When the State has granted an individual the privilege of driving, the burden is on the licensee to understand the law and regulations governing that privilege and consequently there is no requirement that a request for a breath test if made in any language other than English. Decision: 4 N.J.A.R. 439; Where no confusion in the mind of the licensee is shown, refusal to submit to a breath test is not justified by having been read both Miranda warnings and the standard refusal form. Decision: 4 N.J.A.R. 069; The inability to give a knowing and intelligent refusal to a breath test is not a valid defense to a refusal. Decision: 6 N.J.A.R. 173

Remand: Where the Director of the Division of Motor Vehicles remands a case to an administrative law judge to allow for the testimony of a breathalyzer operator who did not appear at the original hearing, such a remand is improper and does not allow the judge to fulfill his independent role. Decision: 2 N.J.A.R. 034