Font Size: 
Penny-Popping N.J. Judge Disciplined for DWI
Two judges disciplined, but one draws heavier sanctions due to additional actions related to his arrest
New Jersey Law Journal
June 04, 2009
The New Jersey Supreme Court on Tuesday disciplined two municipal judges convicted of drunken driving, issuing a reprimand to Robert Jones, of Livingston, and a censure to Peter Tourison, who presides in Cape May, Stone Harbor and Middle Township.
Tourison's sanction was heavier because, in addition to the DWI charge, he caused property damage and interfered with the police investigative process by placing foreign objects in his mouth, which could have fouled the Alcotest results.
Under a new policy adopted by the Court, judges convicted of DWI offenses are disqualified for one year from presiding over such cases. See related story: "Longer Time-Outs for N.J. Judges Charged With DWI, Domestic Violence."
Tourison was arrested on March 27, 2008, after police received a report that his BMW was driving in the wrong direction on Bayshore Road in Lower Township and had forced another driver to swerve his car onto the shoulder to avoid a crash. Tourison then proceeded to a Wawa parking lot where he struck a parked Ford Explorer.
An officer on the scene detected the odor of alcohol on Tourison, who said he had consumed only two drinks but then failed most of the field sobriety tests.
At the stationhouse, Tourison applied ChapStick to his lips, prompting an officer to confiscate the lip balm and instruct him not to put anything near or around his mouth because foreign matter can impede proper administration of the Alcotest. When the officer turned his head, Tourison took out a second tube of ChapStick, only to have it taken away as well. After waiting 20 minutes from the time Tourison applied the ChapStick, in line with state rules for administration of the Alcotest, the officer then noticed Tourison had placed a penny in his mouth.
The officer ordered Tourison to remove the penny and empty his pockets, and waited another 20 minutes before administering the breath test. Tourison's blood-alcohol concentration was .08 percent, the threshold for intoxication. He pleaded guilty to DWI and was fined $400, plus costs and fees.
The imposition of a censure, rather than a reprimand, was based on Tourison's attempts to impede the police investigation, the property damage and risk of injury to others created by his driving.
The Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct, which recommended the censure, said Tourison acknowledged his alcohol problem and has undertaken professional treatment. The committee also noted that his reputation as a knowledgeable and impartial judge was a mitigating factor.
Jones was arrested on Feb. 17, 2008, in Parsippany-Troy Hills after being stopped on Parsippany Boulevard. Police reported that they smelled alcohol on Jones, that his eyes were watery and bloodshot, and that he failed the field sobriety tests. Jones told the arresting officer he had not had anything to drink, although he later told the ACJC that he had consumed six drinks. His blood-alcohol concentration was .16 percent.
He pleaded guilty to a charge of DWI and was fined $375, plus costs and fees; his license was suspended for seven months; he was disqualified from hearing DWI cases for at least that length of time; and he was ordered to spend 12 hours at the Intoxicated Drivers Resource Center.
He told the ACJC, which ended up recommending a reprimand, that he "made a very big mistake in judgment" by driving while intoxicated. He said he realized he had an alcohol problem and still is involved with the New Jersey Lawyers Assistance Program and Alcoholics Anonymous.
The ACJC noted with disapproval Jones' dishonesty when asked at the scene whether he had consumed alcoholic beverages but acknowledged Jones' comments to the committee that his statement was made out of fear.
The Supreme Court found that Jones and Tourison each violated Code of Judicial Conduct Canons 1 (a judge must observe high standards of conduct), 2A (a judge must act in a manner that promotes public confidence in the judiciary), and 5A(2) (a judge should conduct extrajudicial activities in a manner that does not demean the judicial office).
But the Court found Tourison's actions also constituted misconduct in office, in violation of R. 2:15-8(a)(1), and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice that brings the judicial office into disrepute, in violation of R.2:15-8(a)(6).
