STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. FEVZI ARIF(6077, PASSAIC COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
A-3147-15T1
| N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. | Jul 31, 2017Background
- On May 14, 2008 Officer Jay Arnold stopped Fevzi Arif after observing lane crossing and a turn; vomit and a strong odor of alcohol were present in the vehicle and on Arif's breath.
- Arnold administered field sobriety tests; after failing, Arif was arrested and later produced a .10 BAC on an Alcotest at police headquarters.
- Arif failed to appear for multiple municipal court dates; trial proceeded in 2015, seven years after the arrest, with officers testifying largely from their contemporaneous reports because they could not recall details.
- Defense presented two experts challenging the reliability of the field sobriety testing and the Alcotest administration; Arif did not testify.
- Municipal court convicted Arif of DWI (third offense), and on de novo review the Law Division (Judge Sokalski) again found the officers credible, admitting their report-based testimony under habit/record-recollection doctrines, and found the experts’ critiques speculative.
- Arif appealed, arguing insufficient proof of operation under the influence and improper/unstable Alcotest administration; the Appellate Division affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Arif operated a vehicle under the influence | Officers observed impairment indicators (vomit, odor, poor driving, failed field tests) and a .10 BAC; testimony credible | Expert attack on field tests and challenges to Alcotest reliability create reasonable doubt | Conviction affirmed: officers credible; combined observations and .10 BAC support guilt beyond a reasonable doubt |
| Whether the Alcotest was administered and functioning properly to support per se offense | Alcotest result (.10) admissible; administration and machine functioning not shown faulty | Defense experts argued flaws/speculation about administration and machine reliability render per se charge unreliable | Court found defense critiques speculative and unsupported by record; Alcotest result upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Johnson, 42 N.J. 146 (1964) (standard for reviewing factual findings of trial courts)
- State v. Locurto, 157 N.J. 463 (1999) (appellate courts do not independently reassess evidence; deference to trial factfinders)
- Midler v. Heinowitz, 10 N.J. 123 (1952) (principles on altering concurrent findings of fact)
- Manalapan Realty, L.P. v. Manalapan Twp. Comm., 140 N.J. 366 (1995) (no deference to legal conclusions)
- State v. Brown, 118 N.J. 595 (1990) (distinction between factual findings and legal conclusions)