State v. BottomlyState v. Bottomly
The sentence was stayed and an appeal de novo was heard in the Superior Court, Law Division where Judge Bachman again found Bottomly guilty of all four offenses. He imposed the exact sentence which had been stayed in the Municipal Court with an additional assessment of court costs. Thereafter Bottomly successfully applied for modification of his sentence, the suspension portion of which was reduced from one year to six months.
This appeal ensued in which Bottomly claims that the following errors warrant reversal.
Point I The stop of appellant‘s vehicle by the Woodbridge Township Police officers was without probable cause and constituted an unlawful search and seizure.
Point II Appellant was not afforded Miranda rights, hence, his responses to questions posed during custodial interrogation are inadmissible.
We find that these contentions are without merit. In our view Judge Bachman‘s analysis of the issues presented was entirely proper as was his conclusion that there was ample admissible evidence in the record to undergird Bottomly‘s convictions. We thus affirm substantially for the reasons expressed in Judge Bachman‘s opinion of November 5, 1984.
Affirmed.