The Fundamentals of the Glove Box Defense and DWI Charges
It wouldn’t be the first time it happened. You were involved in a one car accident and become distraught. Your first instinct is to drive home since no one else was involved in the incident. Once you get there, you start downing shots. The police arrive to take a report of the incident and suspect you are drunk. You are suddenly faced with DWI charges. Only problem? You weren’t intoxicated when you were behind the wheel. What now?
Enter the glove box defense. It’s also known as the post-operation consumption defense. The good thing? It’s up to the state to disprove claims that the alcohol consumption actually occurred after the person stopped operating their vehicle. Actually, the defendant may have imbibed prior to getting behind the wheel. But, were they intoxicated? Or, did their drunken state occur after they stopped driving?
Understanding the Premise of the Glove Box Defense
The particulars of New Jersey’s drunk driving laws start at NJSA 39:4-50. As it comes to alcohol intoxication, there are two important factors:
- A person must be operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated
- In order to be considered intoxicated, the individual’s blood alcohol content (BAC) level must be in excess of .08%. Obviously, proof of intoxication is an important element of the case.
The glove box defense could work in certain cases. Here’s why it didn’t work in the matter faced by Brian Snyder in this New Jersey Appellate Court decision.
Over the course of three hours, Brian drank three beers at a tavern in South Jersey. He left the bar with the intention of heading home. Unfortunately, as he backed out of his parking space, his vehicle hit a parked car. The property damage was described as minimal.
Brian was not initially aware that his pickup truck struck another vehicle. Another man advised him of the damage as he was about to exit onto the highway. Brian pulled over and examined the other car. He then decided to re-enter the bar with the intention of making arrangements concerning repairs to the damaged vehicle. In the meantime, Brian called his wife to ask for a ride home. He planned on leaving his truck at the tavern.
The woman whose car had been hit was not happy. In fact, she seemed quite upset. Brian returned to his truck to wait for his wife. He went into his glove box and pulled out a whisky bottle. Brian proceeded to drink three shots of alcohol.
Soon thereafter, the police arrived on the scene. Brian was not even aware that they had been called. When questioned, Brian admitted that he drank three beers in the tavern. However, he concealed the bottle of whiskey and neglected to mention the shots. A breathalyzer test found Brian’s BAC in excess of the legal limits. He also failed a field sobriety test. Brain was arrested and charged with drunk driving.
Why didn’t the glove box defense work here? Inconsistencies. First, Brian wasn’t even aware that he struck another vehicle. Why did he claim to call his wife for a ride home if there wasn’t an issue before he drank the whiskey? Did Brian really only become intoxicated after he stopped driving? Or, was he drunk when he intended to leave the bar? Unfortunately for Brian, his testimony did not seem credible to the trial judge. It seemed apparent that Brian was driving while intoxicated.
Contact Us
There are times that a glove box defense is plausible. At the Law Offices of Beninato & Matrafaljo, we have combined decades of experience handling DWI matters. We consider ever available defense in accordance with the law. Contact us to see how we can assist you.