He proceeded after him, and stopped him on Route 619. There were no other cars in the area when he locked the K-55 onto defendant's vehicle, he got a reading of 51 miles per hour. The Chief thought he was driving 45 to 50 miles per hour. When the Chief first observed defendant's vehicle, he was driving northbound on Harrison Street and appeared to be exceeding the twenty-five mile per hour speed limit. In this respect, the Chief testified that, using the tuning forks both when he first started his patrol and after he issued defendant's summons, he determined that the K-55 device was operating accurately. In addition to providing this certification, the State produced an April 27, 1995, certificate of calibration for the K-55 device the Chief used and certificates, dated September 27, 1996, of the two tuning forks used by the Chief the day of the infraction. His most recent certification was issued in May 1996 and expired in May 1999, subsequent to the speeding infraction and subsequent to the Chief's municipal court testimony. The Chief was originally trained and certified to operate the K-55 device during his initial police academy training in 1968 and, since then has been recertified as an operator every five years. On January 14, 1997, at 12:56 p.m., the Frenchtown Chief of Police was parked "alongside the road in the Plessi parking lot." His patrol vehicle had a K-55 device which was in a stationary mode. We do, however, comment on the discovery problems encountered by defendant as we are concerned they may reflect an erroneous understanding by the municipal judge of the scope of discovery a defendant charged with speeding is entitled to and an unsupported conclusion by the Superior Court judge that the municipal prosecutor's insistence upon a fee of $25 for the discovery was reasonable. We need not, therefore, address the other issues raised. We agree and for that reason alone, we reverse the conviction and fine.
Among the variety of issues raised, he contends that the State did not establish beyond a reasonable doubt the necessary basis for his conviction of speeding pursuant to N.J.S.A. The opinion of the court was delivered by,ĭefendant appeals his Municipal Court and, on de novo appeal, Superior Court, Law Division, speeding conviction and resulting $107 fine. Prosecutor, of counsel and on the brief). Rubin, Hunterdon County Prosecutor,Īttorney for respondent (Marcia A. On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, (NOTE: This decision was approved by the court for publication.)
0 kommentar(er)
