STATE v NUNNALLY A-6031-09T1
In this appeal we addressed the statute governing refusal by a commercial vehicle driver to submit to a breath test (CDL refusal), N.J.S.A. 39:3-10.24, and the general statute penalizing refusal to submit to a breath test (general refusal), N.J.S.A. 39:4-50.4a. We held that a charge of CDL refusal or general refusal requires, as a predicate, an arrest under the corresponding DUI statute, N.J.S.A. 39:3-10.13 or N.J.S.A. 39:4- 50. Here, where defendant was arrested under the CDL statute, N.J.S.A. 39:3-10.13, and then refused to submit to a breath test, he could not be prosecuted for general refusal, N.J.S.A. 39:4-50.4a. We also held that, because citing the wrong refusal statute is not a technical defect, R. 7:2-5, and because CDL refusal is not a lesser included offense of general refusal, R. 7:14-2, the State was precluded from amending the complaint to charge defendant with CDL refusal after the ninety-day statute of limitations expired. For future guidance, we noted that a commercial vehicle driver whose conduct violates both the CDL and general DUI statutes may be arrested and charged under either or both statutes.5-04-11
