STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. VINCENT LAING (11-01-0018, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
A-0289-14T2
N.J. Super. App. Div. UMay 17, 2017Background
- June 24, 2009: Defendant Vincent Laing drove a Honda Accord that crossed into opposing lanes at high speed and struck an elderly woman's car, killing her; experts found defendant took no evasive action and estimated his speed at ~63–64 mph.
- First responders found Laing lethargic; he was transported to the hospital, treated (including morphine, Versed, Diprivan) and hospitalized until July 3, 2009.
- At ~7:20 p.m. police ordered a blood draw at the hospital without a warrant; the sample contained alprazolam, oxycodone, and morphine; a forensic psychopharmacologist testified these levels would impair driving.
- Laing made post-Miranda statements acknowledging taking oxycodone that morning and Xanax the prior night, and that he had no memory of the crash; he also had prior felony convictions.
- Criminal trial: Laing convicted of second-degree vehicular homicide and third-degree possession of a CDS; trial judge denied suppression of the blood draw, rejected admission of the taxi driver’s driving abstract, found aggravating factors and imposed an 11-year extended term (NERA applies).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Laing) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Warrantless blood draw | Exigency justified warrantless draw due to fatal crash, ongoing investigation, delay threats to dissipating drug evidence | Blood drawn without warrant or valid consent violated Fourth Amendment and state constitution | Denial of suppression affirmed: totality of circumstances (fatal accident, hospitalization, extended on-scene investigation) created exigency (McNeely/Adkins framework) |
| 2. Prosecutorial misconduct (opening, summation, witness questioning) | Statements and questions were fair argument, aimed at credibility; objections were made and court handled them; no prejudicial misconduct | Prosecutor appealed to passion, improperly attacked defendant and elicited improper lay opinion from Detective Kerecman | No reversible misconduct: comments were within bounds, objections addressed, court limited witness opinion testimony; no plain error |
| 3. Admission of taxi driver’s driving record | N/A (State opposed admission) | Driving abstract was relevant to third-party fault and consciousness of guilt for leaving scene; should have been admitted defensively | Trial court did not abuse discretion: abstract speculative as to motive and had low probative value outweighed by prejudice/confusion under Rule 403 standard |
| 4. Sentence excessive / extended term | Proper application of aggravating factors and extended-term statutes justified sentence; trial judge considered mitigating arguments | Eleven-year extended term subject to NERA is excessive and an abuse of discretion | Sentence affirmed: findings supported by record, correct standards applied, not clearly unreasonable under appellate standard |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Adkins, 221 N.J. 300 (N.J. 2015) (applies McNeely and adopts totality-of-circumstances test for warrantless blood draws in DUI/fatal crashes)
- Missouri v. McNeely, 569 U.S. 141 (U.S. 2013) (dissipation of alcohol alone does not create per se exigency; exigency is fact-specific)
- State v. Jones, 441 N.J. Super. 317 (App. Div. 2015) (discusses special facts that can justify warrantless blood draws post-McNeely)
- State v. Timmendequas, 161 N.J. 515 (N.J. 1999) (failure to timely object to prosecutor’s remarks generally bars relief; factors for reviewing summation misconduct)
- State v. Weaver, 219 N.J. 131 (N.J. 2014) (standards for admitting third-party bad-act evidence defensively; probative value vs. Rule 403 concerns)
- State v. O'Donnell, 117 N.J. 210 (N.J. 1989) (appellate standard of review for sentencing; when appellate court must disturb sentence)