Sidler v. Strelecki

• Decision Date: 18 January 1968
• Docket Number: No. A--1520,A--1520
• Parties: Emanuel SIDLER, Appellant, v. June STRELECKI, Director of Motor Vehicles, Respondent.
• Court: New Jersey Superior Court — Appellate Division

Page 530

98 N.J.Super. 530

237 A.2d 903

Emanuel SIDLER, Appellant, v. June STRELECKI, Director of Motor Vehicles, Respondent.

No. A--1520.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Argued Jan. 15, 1968.

Decided Jan. 18, 1968.

Edward F. Merrey, Jr., Paterson, for appellant (Merrey & Merrey, Paterson, attorneys, Leo J. Gellene, Paterson, on the brief).

Thomas J. Savage, Deputy Atty. Gen., for respondent (Mr. Arthur J. Sills, Atty. Gen., attorney).

Before Judges GOLDMANN, KILKENNY and CARTON.

The opinion of the court was delivered

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from the six-month suspension of his driving privileges by the Director of the Division of Motor Vehicles. The suspension resulted from his refusal to take the alcohol breath test authorized by L.1966, c. 142, § 2; N.J.S.A. 39:4--50.2.

Under section 4 of the 1966 act, N.J.S.A. 39:4--50.4, the operator of a motor vehicle may request a hearing before the Director in connection with such suspension of driving privileges. Defendant requested a hearing. The statute provides that the Director shall determine whether (1) the arresting officer had reasonable grounds to believe that the person charged was driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, (2) that person was placed under arrest, and (3) he refused to submit to the breath test upon request of the officer. The Director found that all three requirements of the statute had been satisfied, and thereupon suspended defendant's driving privileges for six months.

The record provides substantial support for the Director's findings. Defendant first claims that the request to submit to the breath test was not clearly and effectively communicated. After taking defendant to headquarters, the arresting officer read to him paragraph 20 of the form entitled 'Police Report of Refusal to Submit to Breath Alcohol Determination Test':

'I have reason to believe that you have operated a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. I would like you to submit to a breath test. A record of the chemical breath test will be made and a copy given to you when the test is completed. In addition, you may have a person or physician of your own choosing to take samples of your breath, blood or urine. No test will be taken from you forcibly or against physical resistance. If you refuse, a report will be forwarded to the Director of Motor Vehicles, which may result in the loss of your driving privileges. NOW, I ASK YOU, WILL YOU SUBMIT TO A BREATH TEST?'

His reply to the request was 'I am not taking any test'--a flat refusal.

We hold that this was a clear and effective communication of a request...