The New Jersey Supreme Court has approved the upending of a jail sentence imposed on a motorist who fatally struck a pedestrian—and in the process offered some sentencing guidance to municipal judges handling careless driving cases.
The court on Sept. 30 ordered a remand for more thorough consideration of the sentence using the same factors governing sentencing in reckless driving cases.
"All careless driving situations are not the same, even if each offense meets the same statutory elements," the court said. "On a 'scale of opprobriousness,' some offenses will weigh in at the highest end of the scale, while others do not."
According to the opinion, the accident occurred in February 2010, when defendant Diana Palma was turning her Ford Expedition from Bergen Place onto Broad Street in Red Bank, N.J. Alla Tsiring, who was crossing Broad Street, was struck and dragged for a time before Palma was stopped by another motorist.
Tsiring, 44, died from her injuries two months later, the opinion stated.
Palma, who was licensed and not intoxicated at the time of the accident, avoided criminal charges, but was cited for careless driving and failure to yield to a pedestrian, according to the opinion.
Palma pleaded guilty to careless driving and was sentenced by Red Bank Municipal Court Judge William Himelman to 15 days in Monmouth County Jail, to be served on weekends, as well as a 90-day license suspension and $241 in fines and costs. Custodial sentencing is provided for in the careless driving statute.
Palma, taking issue with the jail term, sought review by the Law Division, but Superior Court Judge Ronald Reisner imposed the same sentence.
In June 2012, however, Appellate Division Judges Marie Lihotz, Alexander Waugh Jr. and Jerome St. John vacated the sentence and remanded the case, ruling that the judges below should have considered the factors previously laid out in the 2010 Supreme Court case State v. Moran.
There, the Supreme Court said judges imposing a license suspension for reckless driving—a more serious charge than careless driving—should consider seven factors: the nature and circumstances of the defendant's actions, the defendant's driving record, the time passed since any previous infractions, the defendant's character and attitude, whether the conduct is unlikely to recur, any excessive hardship the sentence would cause, and the need for personal deterrence.
On appeal to the Supreme Court in Palma's case, prosecutors argued that the appeals court misinterpreted Moran and wrongly ruled that Tsiring's death in itself was not reason enough for the custodial sentence. Palma, meanwhile, contended that something beyond carelessness is required for a jail term to be issued, according to the opinion.
On Sept. 30, the Supreme Court, led by temporarily assigned Appellate Division Judge Ariel Rodriguez, acknowledged the factual differences between Moran and Palma's case. But the unanimous court affirmed, calling jail time a "consequence of magnitude" and holding that, "in order to promote the goals of predictability and elimination of disparity, we conclude that the Moran factors should be used to guide sentencing decisions in careless driving convictions."
Reisner erred in consulting the state Criminal Code for sentencing factors, Rodriguez said, noting that careless driving "is not a crime but rather a petty offense."
"It is clear from the existing case law that the Legislature and this court have expressed an intent to keep motor vehicle violations separate and apart from criminal convictions," Rodriguez added. "This court has so stated this intent in the context of DUI convictions."
Rodriguez said judges, in evaluating the sentencing factors, should consider all relevant information—including that excluded from evidence, such as hearsay—but must take care to exclude "extraneous" information.
Appellate Division Judge Mary Catherine Cuff, temporarily assigned to the court, didn't participate in the ruling.
Palma's counsel, Red Bank-based solo Paul Zager, said he's never heard of another case where a careless driving conviction was met with a custodial sentence.
He added that Palma is grateful that the sentence was vacated, "but now she has to start all over."
"It's been five years, and everyone wants to move on," Zager said. "It's just a very sad case."
Assistant Monmouth County Prosecutor Paul Heinzel, who represented the state, didn't return a call. Office spokesman Charles Webster didn't respond to an email seeking comment.
The court on Sept. 30 ordered a remand for more thorough consideration of the sentence using the same factors governing sentencing in reckless driving cases.
"All careless driving situations are not the same, even if each offense meets the same statutory elements," the court said. "On a 'scale of opprobriousness,' some offenses will weigh in at the highest end of the scale, while others do not."
According to the opinion, the accident occurred in February 2010, when defendant Diana Palma was turning her Ford Expedition from Bergen Place onto Broad Street in Red Bank, N.J. Alla Tsiring, who was crossing Broad Street, was struck and dragged for a time before Palma was stopped by another motorist.
Tsiring, 44, died from her injuries two months later, the opinion stated.
Palma, who was licensed and not intoxicated at the time of the accident, avoided criminal charges, but was cited for careless driving and failure to yield to a pedestrian, according to the opinion.
Palma pleaded guilty to careless driving and was sentenced by Red Bank Municipal Court Judge William Himelman to 15 days in Monmouth County Jail, to be served on weekends, as well as a 90-day license suspension and $241 in fines and costs. Custodial sentencing is provided for in the careless driving statute.
Palma, taking issue with the jail term, sought review by the Law Division, but Superior Court Judge Ronald Reisner imposed the same sentence.
In June 2012, however, Appellate Division Judges Marie Lihotz, Alexander Waugh Jr. and Jerome St. John vacated the sentence and remanded the case, ruling that the judges below should have considered the factors previously laid out in the 2010 Supreme Court case State v. Moran.
There, the Supreme Court said judges imposing a license suspension for reckless driving—a more serious charge than careless driving—should consider seven factors: the nature and circumstances of the defendant's actions, the defendant's driving record, the time passed since any previous infractions, the defendant's character and attitude, whether the conduct is unlikely to recur, any excessive hardship the sentence would cause, and the need for personal deterrence.
On appeal to the Supreme Court in Palma's case, prosecutors argued that the appeals court misinterpreted Moran and wrongly ruled that Tsiring's death in itself was not reason enough for the custodial sentence. Palma, meanwhile, contended that something beyond carelessness is required for a jail term to be issued, according to the opinion.
On Sept. 30, the Supreme Court, led by temporarily assigned Appellate Division Judge Ariel Rodriguez, acknowledged the factual differences between Moran and Palma's case. But the unanimous court affirmed, calling jail time a "consequence of magnitude" and holding that, "in order to promote the goals of predictability and elimination of disparity, we conclude that the Moran factors should be used to guide sentencing decisions in careless driving convictions."
Reisner erred in consulting the state Criminal Code for sentencing factors, Rodriguez said, noting that careless driving "is not a crime but rather a petty offense."
"It is clear from the existing case law that the Legislature and this court have expressed an intent to keep motor vehicle violations separate and apart from criminal convictions," Rodriguez added. "This court has so stated this intent in the context of DUI convictions."
Rodriguez said judges, in evaluating the sentencing factors, should consider all relevant information—including that excluded from evidence, such as hearsay—but must take care to exclude "extraneous" information.
Appellate Division Judge Mary Catherine Cuff, temporarily assigned to the court, didn't participate in the ruling.
Palma's counsel, Red Bank-based solo Paul Zager, said he's never heard of another case where a careless driving conviction was met with a custodial sentence.
He added that Palma is grateful that the sentence was vacated, "but now she has to start all over."
"It's been five years, and everyone wants to move on," Zager said. "It's just a very sad case."
Assistant Monmouth County Prosecutor Paul Heinzel, who represented the state, didn't return a call. Office spokesman Charles Webster didn't respond to an email seeking comment.
No comments:
Post a Comment