STATE v. KOCH
Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.
Argued April 4, 2011.
Having determined that the conviction must be vacated due to the exclusion of D-5, and the failure to give Miranda warnings, we do not address the remaining contentions:
THE LAW DIVISION JUDGE WAS OBLIGATED TO MAKE HIS OWN EVIDENTIARY RULINGS AND FINDINGS OF FACT. INSTEAD, HE UNDULY DEFERRED TO THE RULINGS AND FINDINGS OF THE MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE. BOTH JUDGES' EXCLUSION OF THE PROFFERED EVIDENCE WAS ERRONEOUS.
OFFICER DEWITT'S TESTIMONY WAS NOT CREDIBLE NOR SUFFICIENT TO SUSTAIN A VERDICT OF GUILTY BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
THE STATE'S BURDEN OF PROOF IN A CRIMINAL CASE IS PROOF BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. NEITHER A MERE PREPONDERANCE OF THE CREDIBLE EVIDENCE, NOR THE PRESENTATION OF CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE IS SUFFICIENT TO MEET THE STATE'S BURDEN IN A CRIMINAL CASE. THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED IN THE TRIAL COURT BY THE STATE'S SOLE WITNESS IS OUTWEIGHED BY THE TESTIMONY OF [KOCH], ASHLEY PERCH AND EXHIBIT D-5, SHOULD HAVE BEEN A DEFENSE VERDICT.
THE PROOF PRESENTED WAS INADEQUATE TO ESTABLISH THAT [KOCH] HAD INGESTED AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE. AN OBJECTIVE, SCIENTIFICALLY-RELIABLE TEST WOULD BE NEEDED IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH THE PRESENCE OF ALCOHOL IN A HUMAN BODY. A POLICE OFFICER'S NOSE IS NOT A SCIENTIFICALLY-RELIABLE INSTRUMENT FOR THE DETECTION OF ALCOHOL IN THE HUMAN BODY. VERIFIABLE TESTING IS DESIRABLE. A `SNIFF' TEST MAY BE ADEQUATE FOR PURPOSES OF ESTABLISHING PROBABLE CAUSE TO INVESTIGATE FURTHER, BUT IS NOT SUFFICIENT FOR ESTABLISHING GUILT BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
The conviction is reversed.
1. The charges arose in Independence Township, but the trial was held in the Mansfield Township municipal court due to the judge's schedule.
2. Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L. Ed. 2d 694 (1966).