STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. JOHN G. NOTTE

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-aa2678-08T4

STATE OF NEW JERSEY,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

JOHN G. NOTTE,

Defendant-Appellant.

 

Submitted May 19, 2010 - Decided

Before Judges Kestin and Graves.

On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey,

Law Division, Burlington County, Municipal

Appeal No. 38-08.

James E. Crovo, attorney for appellant.

Robert D. Bernardi, Burlington County

Prosecutor, attorney for respondent

(Jennifer Paszkiewicz, Assistant Prosecutor,

of counsel and on the brief).

PER CURIAM

Defendant, John G. Notte, appeals from his conviction in the Law Division on appeal de novo on the record, pursuant to Rule 3:23-8, from the Bordentown Municipal Court. He was found guilty of violating N.J.S.A. 39:4-50(a), driving while intoxicated (DWI), into which a charge of reckless driving, N.J.S.A. 39:4-96, had been merged. In the Bordentown Municipal Court, defendant had also been convicted of violating N.J.S.A. 39:4-88(b), failure to maintain his lane of travel, but did not appeal from this latter conviction.

On the DWI conviction, defendant was sentenced, as a third offender, to a jail term of 180 days, ninety days of which could be served in an IDRC-approved in-patient drug rehabilitation facility; thirty days of community service; a ten-year loss of driving and registration privileges; and various amounts in fines, costs, fees, assessments, and insurance surcharges. Pursuant to an order entered in the Law Division, defendant has been at liberty on bail pending both appeals.

Judge Harold B. Wells, III considered and, in written and oral opinions memorialized in an order, disposed of all the arguments defendant had raised in his de novo appeal. In this appeal, defendant raises those arguments again. Our review of the record in the light of the arguments advanced by the parties discloses that Judge Wells gave full consideration to all of the issues raised and disposed of each for good and ample reasons stated. We affirm on the basis of his opinions. See also State v. Ugrovics, 410 N.J. Super. 482 (App. Div. 2009), decided since the date of Judge Wells's consideration of the matter.

 
Affirmed.

(continued)

(continued)

2

A-2678-08T4

June 16, 2010