State v. Dolce

Citation165 N.J.Super. 488,398 A.2d 610
PartiesThe STATE of New Jersey v. James DOLCE, Jr., Defendant. (Criminal)
Decision Date01 February 1979
CourtSuperior Court of New Jersey

Joseph Hillman, Jr., Belmar, for defendant.

John F. Hazard, Jr., Freehold, for the State (Alexander D. Lehrer, Prosecutor of Monmouth County, Freehold, attorney).

SHEBELL, J. S. C.

Defendant has applied for conditional discharge status under § 27 of the New Jersey Controlled Dangerous Substances Act, N.J.S.A. 24:21-1 Et seq. Defendant, who is 39 years of age, was arrested following an investigation precipitated by the finding of drugs in the blood of his racehorse which had been in racing competition at a New Jersey track. A search revealed various horse medications illegally in the possession of defendant, for which he was charged. The controlled dangerous substances, which are the subject matter of the pending charges under N.J.S.A. 24:21-20(a)(1), were not intended for and their possession was not related to any human consumption.

Defendant asserts his eligibility for conditional discharge treatment in light of the plain language of N.J.S.A. 24:21-2(a), which states that "whenever Any person * * * is charged with or convicted of Any offense under subsections 20 a. (1), (2) and (3)," the court may grant such relief upon making the necessary findings under subsection (c) thereof. (Emphasis supplied). He cites the Supreme Court's decisions in the companion cases of State v. Alston, 71 N.J. 1, 362 A.2d 545 (1976), and State v. Sayko, 71 N.J. 8, 362 A.2d 549 (1976), which require that application of the conditional discharge provisions of the statute not be limited only to those persons shown to be drug users. The court in Sayko stated, in reaffirming its holding in Alston :

The statute is intended to assist first offenders in turning away from drug involvement before they become too deeply enmeshed and to spare those who successfully respond to the program from the stigma of a criminal record. (71 N.J. 13, 362 A.2d 552.)

The aforesaid holding is in full keeping with the purpose of the statute as announced by Governor William Cahill on April 27, 1970 in his message to the Legislature, "Drug Abuse Problem of the Decade":

* * * the proposed act takes a first legislative step at recognizing that use of drugs is a social or medical illness. Thus, with respect to persons charged with use or possession of any dangerous drug for the first time, the act confers upon the Court the new...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • State v. Dolce
    • United States
    • New Jersey Superior Court – Appellate Division
    • April 3, 1981
    ...Substance Act (N.J.S.A. 24:21-27). His motion was denied by Judge Shebell, whose opinion is reported in State v. Dolce, 165 N.J.Super. 488, 398 A.2d 610 (Law Div.1979). Defendant then moved to suppress the evidence seized by the detectives. Judge Cunningham, at the conclusion of a contested......
  • Wendling v. New Jersey Racing Com'n
    • United States
    • New Jersey Superior Court – Appellate Division
    • February 14, 1995
    ...to interfere with the fair and proper conduct of the racing industry are effectively policed and regulated. State v. Dolce, 165 N.J.Super. 488, 491, 398 A.2d 610 (Law Div.1979), aff'd., 178 N.J.Super. 275, 428 A.2d 947 (App.Div.1981). The Legislature granted the Commission broad powers to r......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT