Search Rutgers Law Library N.J. Court Opinions

1 State v. Al-Sharif Scriven -- rank: 1000

... Court considers the circumstances under which the high-beam statute, N.J.S.A. 39:3-60, justifies a police stop of a vehicle. While waiting on ... and State Constitutions. The language of the high-beam statute, N.J.S.A. 39:3-60, is unambiguous; drivers are required to dim their high beams ... determine whether a purported violation of the high-beam statute, N.J.S.A. 39:3-60, justified a police stop of a vehicle. The high-beam ... with no oncoming vehicles, the driver was in compliance with N.J.S.A. 39:3-60. On that basis, the court found that the police did ... and State Constitutions. The language of the high-beam statute, N.J.S.A. 39:3-60, is unambiguous; drivers are required to dim their high beams ... Jersey Constitution. The court observed that the high-beam statute, N.J.S.A. 39:3-60, “presupposes that the offending driver’s high beams [ ...

docket:	A-11-15
court:	NJ Supreme Court
decided:	2016-07-20
status:
citation:	226 N.J. 20 140 A.3d 535
Document Size:	87018

2 State v. William L. Witt -- rank: 885

... and articulable suspicion to stop defendant because the relevant statute ( N.J.S.A. 39:3-60) requires drivers to dim their high beams only when approaching ... “reasonable and articulable suspicion” to stop defendant for violating N.J.S.A. 39:3-60 because the statute requires drivers to dim their high beams ... ” within five hundred feet. Id. at 614-16 (quoting N.J.S.A. 39:3-60). The panel reasoned that the officer’s vehicle was not ... not challenge the validity of the motor-vehicle stop under N.J.S.A. 39:3-60 in either his brief or argument before the trial court ... to understand what is at issue in a suppression hearing. N.J.S.A. 39:3-60, in pertinent part, prohibits a driver from using his high ...

docket:	A-9-13
court:	NJ Supreme Court
decided:	2015-09-24
status:
citation:
Document Size:	264557

3 STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. AL-SHARIF SCRIVEN -- rank: 866

... was no valid basis to stop the vehicle for violating N.J.S.A. 39:3-60, the "high beam statute," or pursuant to the community caretaker ... vehicle stands at a distance of seventy-five feet ahead. [ N.J.S.A. 39:3-60 (emphasis added).] A grand jury indicted defendant for second-degree ... a reasonable, articulable suspicion to believe that the driver violated N.J.S.A. 39:3-60. B. Officer Cohen was also permitted to briefly stop [the ... granted." Id. at 384. As in Puzio , Officer Cohen misinterpreted N.J.S.A. 39:3-60. The statute does not prohibit the use of high beams ... Cohen to believe that the driver was in violation of N.J.S.A. 39:3-60 when she was traveling up New York Avenue with her ... Ed. 2d at 482-83. Unlike the statute in Heien , N.J.S.A. 39:3-60 is clear and unambiguous. The plain language of N. ...

docket:	a5680-13
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2015-02-25
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	28549

4 STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. WILLIAM L. WITT -- rank: 791

... possibly fit the definition of "an oncoming vehicle" contained in N.J.S.A. 39:3-60. 5 It has been established that "a police officer is ... vehicle standards at a distance of seventy-five feet ahead. [ N.J.S.A. 39:3-60 (emphasis added).] The right to stop a motor vehicle requires ... Div. 2005). That standard was not met here. As worded, N.J.S.A. 39:3-60 presupposes that the offending driver's high beams are on ... the officer to believe that defendant was in violation of N.J.S.A. 39:3-60 when he drove by, with his high beams on, the ... stop defendant's vehicle because of a perceived violation of N.J.S.A. 39:3-60. 6 We need not decide whether a driver is required ... would suggest such a circumstance would not be violative of N.J.S.A. 39:3-60. Cf. , Maini v. Hassler , 38 N.J. Super. 81 , ...

docket:	a0866-13
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2014-05-21
status:	published
citation:	435 N.J.Super. 608 90 A.3d 664
Document Size:	27701

5 STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. JACQUELIN S. TRUESDALE -- rank: 631

... determined that the driver, later identified as defendant, had violated N.J.S.A. 39:3-60 by failing to lower her high beams. Consequently, based on ... high beams illuminated within 500 feet of a motor vehicle, N.J.S.A. 39:3-60, and reckless driving, N.J.S.A. 39:4-96 ... his vehicle with her high beams illuminated in violation of N.J.S.A. 39:3-60. Defendant then entered a conditional guilty plea to DWI. The ... Olsen's vehicle. There is no question that this violated N.J.S.A. 39:3-60, which requires, in relevant part, that "whenever the driver of ...

docket:	a3069-09
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2010-12-08
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	18869

6 STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. JENNIFER R. WIGGINS -- rank: 602

... reason — he mistakenly and unreasonably believed the driver violated N.J.S.A. 39:3-60. Id. at 39-40. Similarly, in State v. Cryan , we ...

docket:	a1487-15
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2017-05-31
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	76764

7 STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. JULIANNE DeGILIO -- rank: 547

... 39:4-50.2, and improper use of high beams, N.J.S.A. 39:3-60. Defendant appealed her conviction to the Law Division. The court ...

docket:	a4061-09
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2011-04-13
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	35013