STATE v. HAMM


121 N.J. 109 (1990)

577 A.2d 1259

STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. DONALD HAMM, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Decided August 6, 1990.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Michael R. Speck argued the cause for appellant (Francis X. Moore, attorney; Michael R. Speck and Francis X. Moore, on the briefs).

Mark P. Stalford, Assistant Prosecutor, argued the cause for respondent (John Kaye, Monmouth County Prosecutor, attorney).

Linda K. Danielson, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for amicus curiae Attorney General of New Jersey (Robert J. Del Tufo, Attorney General, attorney).

Brian J. Neary argued the cause on behalf of amicus curiae Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers of New Jersey.


The opinion of the Court was delivered by O'HERN, J.

The question in this case is whether a defendant, after having been twice convicted of driving while intoxicated (DWI) in violation of N.J.S.A. 39:4-50(a), has a constitutional right to trial by jury for a third DWI offense. We hold that the statutory penalties for DWI are not so severe as to clearly reflect a legislative determination of a constitutionally "serious" offense requiring jury trial.

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases