Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Reiner

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division

Decided October 1, 2003Published

1Dissent

FUENTES, J.A.D.,

dissenting.

My colleagues in the majority have concluded that defendant is subject to the enhanced penalties expressly reserved for second offenders under N.J.S.A. 39:4-50(g), despite the fact that this is the first time he has committed this type of offense. I disagree and therefore dissent. The majority’s conclusion runs counter to well established principles of statutory construction, undermines the policy of deterrence underlying the linkage between offense-specific recidivism and the escalation of punishment and needlessly casts irito doubt the statute’s constitutionality.

I…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Jones v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
  2. Gryger v. BurkeSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
  3. State v. ButlerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1982
  4. State v. HoffmanSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1997
  5. State v. MaguireSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1980

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API