DWI Information

No. Because DWI isn’t prosecuted as a criminal matter, you’ll face a trial that is presided over by a Municipal Court Judge who will hear the evidence against you, listen to your defense, and who will issue rulings on any disputes over fact or law in the case.

Eventually, the judge will determine whether or not you are guilty, and if convicted, will sentence you based on the facts of your case.

Conviction is not a given in NJ DWI cases.

I have defended more 1,000 DWI cases with no convictions, and I can help you.

Call attorney Matthew Reisig at 732-625-9660 for a free consultation with one of New Jersey’s most experience DWI lawyers.

If you live in NJ — or are job hunting while visiting New Jersey—you may be asking yourself: Will a past DWI show up on background checks and ruin my chances with potential employers?

The good news? In most situations, you may not need to worry. Unlike many states, New Jersey classifies Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) as a traffic offense, not a criminal offense. That distinction matters a lot when it comes to job applications and background checks.

DWIs and Background Checks in New Jersey

Most standard employment background checks look for criminal convictions. Since a DWI in New Jersey is not considered criminal, it usually won’t appear on that kind of report. That’s a relief for many people looking to move forward with their lives after a DWI conviction.

However, not all background checks are the same. Some employers, especially for positions involving vehicles, sensitive information, or public safety, may request driving records or more in-depth screenings. Your DWI will show up on a motor vehicle abstract, which is public and easy to access.

What If the Job Involves Driving?

If you’re applying for a position that requires a commercial driver’s license (CDL), such as truck driving or delivery work, your chances of getting hired can be significantly impacted. DWIs on a CDL holder’s record are treated more harshly, both by employers and by the law.

In fact, even one DWI offense could disqualify you from holding a CDL for a period of time—or permanently, depending on the circumstances. Employers in transportation, logistics, and construction often have strict policies and won’t take chances when it comes to driving safety.

Do You Have to Tell Employers About a DWI?

While a typical criminal background check might not reveal your DWI, many job applications ask directly about traffic violations, license suspensions, or driving history. If asked, it’s important to be honest. Lying or leaving out information can be more damaging than the DWI itself, especially if the employer finds out later.

In some industries, such as nursing, real estate, law, and finance, state licensing boards may review driving records or conduct additional checks. A DWI could trigger disciplinary action or licensing issues, depending on the profession and severity of the incident.

Can You Remove a DWI from Your Record?

New Jersey does not allow expungement of DWI offenses from your driving record. Once it’s there, it stays—though its impact fades over time. Employers may weigh more recent offenses more heavily than older ones.

Your best chance of minimizing long-term consequences is to avoid a conviction altogether. If you’ve been arrested for DWI in Monmouth, Ocean, or Middlesex County, speak with a knowledgeable local attorney as soon as possible.

Talk to a DWI Defense Lawyer in New Jersey

The consequences of a DWI go far beyond fines and license suspensions—they can affect your future, your career, and your reputation.

If you’ve been charged with DWI, don’t guess about your rights or your options. Call Reisig Criminal Defense & DWI Law to speak with an experienced New Jersey DWI defense attorney. The consultation is free, and they’ve helped countless individuals in your position get the guidance—and results—they needed to move forward with confidence.

Take control of your future. Call now.

Here is a common situation:

A person gets arrested for DWI. The officer who pulled the individual said he or she was crossing the double yellow line. The individual knows they did not. After asking the individual questions about drinking, they answer yes, they had 3 beers. The officer orders the individual to exit the vehicle. He then directed the individual to perform two tests which were standing on one leg and counting to 30 and walking heel to toe for 9 steps and then back.

After the individual does the tests, which they believe they did satisfactorily, the officer handcuffs the individual and takes him or her to the police station. At the police station, the officer directed the individual to blow into a machine which they refused to do.

Should the individual have also refused to have done the tests outside their vehicle?

This DWI issue above relates to the significance or lack of significance, relating to the performance of field sobriety tests before a police officer charges an individual with DWI. The first fact to point out was not arrested for DWI. DWI is not characterized as a crime or criminal offense in New Jersey. It is the only state in the country that does not criminalize some form of DWI in its statute. Therefore, the proper terminology is that the individual was charged with DWI and taken into custody.

The individual states that they answered the police officer’s questions honestly related to prior alcohol consumption. In this circumstance, that was a mistake. An individual who had been drinking and who is pulled over for a DWI investigation should not be honest with the police officer about prior alcohol consumption.

The police officer has no ability to determine what the driver was doing at any point prior to the officer’s first observation of the individual’s motor vehicle on the roadway. Once the individual admits to prior alcohol consumption, there is an overwhelming likelihood that the officer is going to charge that person with DWI. Consequently, an individual should never admit to prior alcohol consumption when asked by a police officer who is investigating them for drunk driving.

During an investigation for DWI, a police officer will always ask an individual to perform field sobriety tests. Most police officers are not certified to conduct what are known as the “Standardized Field Sobriety Tests.” These are Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN), the One Leg Stand, and the Walk and Turn test. These Standardized Field Sobriety Tests are promulgated by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Rather, most police officers are given informal training at a police academy and on the job, which is not equivalent to the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests.

Therefore, most police officers administering field sobriety tests are merely subjectively using these tests to determine probable cause for charging an individual with DWI. It must be emphasized that officers who are not trained in the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests are not evaluating the tests with a prescribed set of objective evaluation criteria.

However, some police officers are trained in the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests as promulgated by NHTSA. If the officer has this specialized training, which requires a 5 day, 40 hour course and testing pursuant to the course description, the officer will always utilize the HGN, One Leg Stand, and Walk and Turn tests. These tests can only be objectively evaluated if they are administered in a standardized fashion.

A person cannot objectively successfully perform field sobriety tests unless these standardized tests are properly administered. Simply put, proper performance is dictated by proper administration of the tests. Even experienced police officers who are certified to conduct the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests fail to properly administer such tests. They take short cuts or forget or overlook the standardized instructions.

A top DWI attorney will immediately point out such deficiencies in discovery process of a DWI or on a videotape of the field sobriety tests provided during the discovery process. Very few DWI defense attorneys are certified in the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests. I became certified in such tests in 2002.

In the opinion of any expert who has ever seen me cross examine a police officer concerning field sobriety testing, no New Jersey defense attorney has ever cross-examined police officers concerning these tests than I have. Indeed a cross-examination that I conducted in a DWI trial in a Camden county municipal court in 2006 was actually used as the model for how cross-examine on HGN by another attorney in a Superior Court challenge to HGN.

In the scenario above, the individual felt that they had “satisfactorily” performed the field sobriety tests. There is no ability for a person to make such a conclusion unless they know the experience level of the police officer who is administering these tests. For instance, a police officer not trained in the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests has absolutely no ability to even evaluate a suspect’s performance on field sobriety tests.

The police officer would have no ability or frame of reference to even make such an evaluation. Therefore, the suspect actually performing the balance tests would have no ability to ever determine how the police officer is evaluating the field sobriety tests.

In the event that the police officer is certified in Standardized Field Sobriety Tests, the suspect would have no meaningful ability to determine their own performance unless they were also qualified in the proper administration of the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests.

The bottom line is that field sobriety tests are utilized by police officers in determining probable cause to charge an individual with DWI. In most cases, it is complete guess work on the part of the police officer who is actually administering these tests. The individual suspected of DWI is merely providing evidence against themselves by agreeing to perform the field sobriety tests.

There is no requirement that an individual requested to perform field sobriety tests is obligated to do so. There is no charge for failing to perform field sobriety tests. It simply does not exist. The individual being investigated for DWI feels that they are cooperating with the police by performing such tests. In actuality, the individual suspected of DWI is merely providing evidence against themselves.

Therefore, an individual being investigated for DWI should never perform field sobriety tests at the request of a police officer. Unless you are the world’s best drinker, or an Olympic gymnast, or a professional athlete, you are going to be charged with DWI after you perform these tests. I would than an intoxicated Olympic gymnast and an intoxicated professional athlete would probably also unsuccessfully perform the field sobriety tests. Let us reiterate the overall answer to this question: do not perform field sobriety tests when asked to do so by a police officer.

If you are facing a DWI charge in New Jersey, contact Reisig Criminal Defense & DWI Law at 732-625-9660.

…. As part of my sentence, the Judge ordered that I must install an interlock device on my car for a period of 1 year once I get my license back. Knowing I was going to lose my license, I sold my car. If I no longer own a car, am I still subject to the interlock requirement?

If you pled guilty to a DWI in New Jersey with a breath test reading of .18, the court likely ordered you to install an Ignition Interlock Device (IID) for one year once your license is reinstated. But if you no longer own a car, does that requirement still apply?

The short answer is yes, the law still applies, but there are specific conditions that impact how it is enforced.

Understanding New Jersey’s Ignition Interlock Law

New Jersey law requires most individuals convicted of DWI or Refusal to Submit to a Breath Test to install an IID in the vehicle they principally operate. This means that if you own or lease a car, you must install the device before legally driving again.

However, if you no longer own or have access to a vehicle, you must prove to the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission (MVC) that you do not have a car available for use. This isn’t an automatic exemption—you need to formally notify the MVC about your situation.

Can You Avoid the Interlock Requirement by Not Owning a Car?

Selling your car before your license suspension does not automatically eliminate the IID requirement. The law states that you cannot drive any vehicle that is not equipped with an IID during your restricted period. If you borrow, rent, or lease a vehicle without an interlock device, you could be charged with a disorderly persons offense and face an additional one-year license suspension.

Even if you currently don’t own a vehicle, you have an ongoing legal duty to notify the MVC if your situation changes. If you later buy or lease another car, the one-year interlock requirement could still apply at that time. Courts have not fully settled whether the clock on the IID penalty starts when your license is reinstated or when you actually obtain a vehicle.

What Happens If You Ignore the Requirement?

Driving without the mandated Ignition Interlock Device can lead to serious consequences:

• A disorderly persons offense (a criminal charge in NJ)
• An additional one-year suspension of your driver’s license
• More court fines and fees
• Potential impact on future car insurance rates

If you plan to drive again in New Jersey, it’s crucial to follow all IID regulations to avoid further legal trouble.

Why You Need an Experienced DWI Attorney

Navigating New Jersey’s complex DWI laws can be overwhelming, especially when dealing with license suspensions, interlock requirements, and legal consequences. Many people don’t realize they have options to challenge their penalties, even after pleading guilty.

For nearly 30 years, Reisig Criminal Defense & DWI Law has been one of New Jersey’s most successful and trusted DWI defense firms. Attorney Matthew Reisig has handled thousands of DWI and Refusal cases, helping clients minimize penalties, challenge evidence, and fight unfair consequences.

If you’re unsure about your Ignition Interlock requirements or facing further legal issues related to your DWI, don’t wait until it’s too late.

Call Reisig Criminal Defense & DWI Law at (732) 625-9660 today for a free consultation.

Protect your rights, your license, and your future.

….then taken to the police station and required to give two samples of my breath. Based on the test results, I was charged with DWI. I was never advised of my “Miranda” rights. Can the test results be used against me?

Yes, the breath test results can be used against you regardless of whether you were ever advised of your Miranda rights. Indeed, Miranda rights have nothing whatsoever to do with providing breath samples upon request by law enforcement for suspicion of violating the DWI statute.

If a law enforcement officer has probable cause to believe that a person has violated the DWI statute, they are only required to read the Attorney General’s Standard Statement promulgated on July 1, 2012 prior to the request for breath samples.

Miranda warnings only apply in criminal and quasi-criminal cases when an individual is in custody and questions are asked designed to elicit incriminating statements against the Defendant. This is what is characterized as custodial interrogation. IN the context of a DWI, Miranda warnings are applicable when the Defendant is asked questions about prior alcohol consumption.

These questions relate to what the person was drinking, where they were drinking, the amount they were drinking, and the time they were drinking. In certain cases where operation of the motor vehicle is in issue, these questions would also have to be preceded by Miranda warning.

Miranda warnings are very significant in criminal cases. They are less significant in DWI cases. While any admissions of prior drinking can be an important fact in a DWI case, the absence of Miranda warnings will rarely be an important consideration in deciding the ultimate determination of a DWI.

If you need assistance with a DWI in New Jersey, give us a call and tell us what happened…. and then let one of the top DWI attorneys get to work for you.

If you’ve been arrested for driving while intoxicated (DWI) in New Jersey, you may have heard both “DWI” and “DUI” used to describe your charge. But is there actually a difference between the two?

The short answer is no. In New Jersey, the terms DWI (Driving While Intoxicated) and DUI (Driving Under the Influence) mean the same thing. The state’s DWI law, N.J.S.A. 39:4-50, makes it illegal to operate a vehicle “while under the influence” of alcohol or drugs. Because of this wording, both DWI and DUI are used interchangeably in New Jersey courts. No matter which term is used, the penalties and legal consequences remain the same.

Understanding New Jersey’s DWI Laws

New Jersey has some of the strictest DWI laws in the country. Unlike some states, DWI is not a criminal offense in New Jersey—it is considered a traffic violation. However, that doesn’t mean the consequences aren’t severe.

Even a first-time offense can result in:

• Fines and surcharges that add up to thousands of dollars
• License suspension
• Ignition interlock device (IID) installation
• Mandatory alcohol education programs
• Jail time in some cases

For repeat offenders, the penalties only get harsher. If you have prior DWI convictions, you could face longer license suspensions, higher fines, and even mandatory jail time.

Why You Need an Experienced DWI Lawyer

If you’ve been charged with a DWI in New Jersey, your next steps are critical. A conviction is not automatic, and with the right legal defense, you may be able to reduce or even beat the charges against you.

DWI cases often rely on police reports, field sobriety tests, and breathalyzer results—all of which can be challenged. Did the officer have probable cause to stop you? Was the breathalyzer calibrated properly? Were field sobriety tests administered correctly? These are just some of the many defenses an experienced attorney can use to fight your case.

Reisig Criminal Defense & DWI Law: Nearly 30 Years of Success

When facing a DWI charge in New Jersey, you need a proven legal team in your corner. Reisig Criminal Defense & DWI Law has been one of the most successful and trusted DWI law firms in New Jersey for almost 30 years.

Attorney Matthew Reisig has built a reputation as a fierce defender of clients’ rights. With thousands of successful DWI cases under his belt, he knows exactly how to challenge the prosecution’s case and protect your future.

Reisig Criminal Defense & DWI Law has a deep understanding of New Jersey’s complex DWI laws, and they use aggressive legal strategies to fight for the best possible outcome—whether that means getting charges reduced, dismissed, or taking the case to trial.

Take Action Now

A DWI conviction can have lasting consequences, but you don’t have to face it alone. With Reisig Criminal Defense & DWI Law on your side, you’ll have one of the best DWI defense teams in New Jersey fighting for you.

Don’t wait—call (732) 625-9660 today for a free consultation. Your future is too important to leave to chance.