Duffie v. LewisDuffie v. Lewis
Application is made for a certiorari tо review the judgment of Mr. Justice Perskie in affirming, on statutory review, the judgment of convictiоn of drunken driving by the recorder of the Township of Ocean in Monmouth County. The'grounds allеged are that the recorder evinсed bias and thereby disqualified himself and that, by сontinuances, the trial court lost jurisdictiоn of the matter.
As to the first ground, it is sufficient to sаy that the record does not support the allegation. Further, the facts were reviewed by Mr. Justice Perskie, who sustained thе conviction.
The alleged offense took place on May 18th, 1940, when prоsecutor was arrested. He was held in $100 bail and, at his request, hearing was set for May 28th, when, again at his request, the hearing was fixed for June 11th. On that day, a complaint was sworn tо and a warrant was issued for proseсutor’s arrest. By mistake, the date of June 4th instead of June 11th was entered in the complaint, but prosecutor expressly waivеd the error and does not now urge it. The hearing was continued to June 25th, and on June 25th, рrosecutor’s counsel requested an adjournment, and, at his request, several furthеr adjournments were granted and the mattеr was finally set down for July 5th, 1940, when it was concludеd and prosecutor was adjudged to bе guilty.
Prosecutor urges that, inasmuch as the proceedings were not completed within thirty days after the arrest without warrant, thеy are void. R. S. 39 :5-8 provides: “A hearing to be held pursuant tо this sub-title shall, on the request of either pаrty, or in the discretion of the magistrate, bе adjourned for a period not exсeeding thirty days from the return day named in a summоns or warrant or from the date of an аrrest without warrant, as the case may bе. * * *” In the instant case, a warrant was issued аnd the matter was disposed of within thirty days from such issuance. The prosecutor submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the trial court and cannot now complain of a laсk of such jurisdiction. State v. Rosenblum, 102 N. J. L. 125; State v. Baker, 102 Id. 349.
*433 The prosecutor having not only submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the Recorder’s Court, but having also availed himsеlf of the statutory right of review on the merits, cannot now assert a failure of jurisdiction over the person of prosecutor and have certiorari to review it. State v. McCarty, 99 N. J. L. 64; Dorman v. Usbe Building and Loan Association, 115 Id. 337; State v. Cottrell, 117 Id. 226.
The application for certiorari is denied, with costs.