E599
1. The Living Will and Being Prepared in the Time of COVID
2. Woodbridge Library & Metuchen Library Wills, Estate Planning & Probate Seminar upcoming on zoom
3. Memorial Day
4. Roadside statements inadmissible were improper roadside stop State v. Alessi
1. The Living Will and Being Prepared in the Time of COVID
The Home News Tribune on May 12 had an excellent article on End of Life directives in Living Wills. This is a challenging time. There are many things that are out of our control. But there are some things we can do to help us be prepared - both for ourselves and the people we care about. Here are three important things each of us can do, right now, to be prepared.
Pick your person to be your health care decision maker
Choose a health care decision maker (often known as a proxy, agent, or health care power of attorney) [usually spouse or child] - a person who will make medical decisions for you if you become too sick to make them for yourself.
Have a talk with your health care decision maker to make sure they know what matters most to you. [usually spouse or child]
Phone calls or video chats are good if you don't live with that person.
Source https://theconversationproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/tcpcovid19guide.pdf
Have a Living Will prepared.
Talk about what matters most to you
Talk with your important people and decision maker about what matters most.
Think about what you would want if you became seriously ill with COVID-19
People who are older or have chronic medical conditions are more likely to become very sick if they get COVID-19. Some will recover with hospital care, but even with ventilator support many will die. Think about what you would want if you became very sick at this time:
© [2020] The Conversation Project Source https://theconversationproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/tcpcovid19guide.pdf
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
Who would you want to make medical decisions for you if you were unable to make them for yourself?
Ahealth care proxy (also called a health care agent or Power of Attorney for Health Care) is the person you choose to make health care decisions
for you if you're too sick to make them for yourself . Your proxy can talk with your doctors, consult your medical records, and make decisions about tests, procedures, and other treatment .
We cannot overstate the importance of choosing a proxy . Too many people - including half of all the people over 65 who are admitted to a hospital - are unable to make decisions for themselves.
Make sure you have chosen someone you trust to speak for you in case you are unable to speak for yourself!
USEFUL DEFINITIONS
It can be hard to keep track of the various names that are used - both for the PERSONyou choose and the DOCUMENT you fill out. Here's the gist:
Names for the PERSON you choose:
Health care proxy: The person you choose to make decisions about your medical care if you become unable to make them for yourself (My brother is my health care proxy.)
Health care agent: Same as above (My brother is my health care agent.)
Source https://theconversationproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/tcpcovid19guide.pdf
"It's always too soon, until it's too late."
Up until age 18, your parent or legal guardian usually serves as your proxy . But once you turn 18, your parents are no longer your automatic health care proxy .So everyone age 18 or older should complete a health care proxy form - even if they're perfectly healthy. If you're over 18 and haven't yet chosen a proxy, the time is now!
It's good to review your choice of proxy at the start of each decade - when you turn 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70...
Review your Living Will:
When you get married or divorced
When you have children
When you become eligible for Medicare
When you are going on a major trip
When you are newly diagnosed with a serious illness
Source https://theconversationproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/tcpcovid19guide.pdf
WHO might be a good choice to be your proxy?
Mother/Father Spouse/Partner Son/Daughter Sister/Brother Friend
It's generally advisable not to name two people to serve as co-proxies - because if they disagree, the situation can become complicated.
Sometimes it is difficult for a partner or spouse to be a proxy.
For example, they may find it too difficult to agree to ending treatment for their loved one, even when you have made your wishes very clear . In this case, it might be wiser to choose someone else .
Institute for Healthcare Improvement www.ihi.org www.theconversationproject.org
2. Woodbridge Library Wills, Estate Planning & Probate Seminar upcoming on zoom
June 15, 2020 at 7pm is now a Live on Zoom event
Login Details upcoming at https://woodbridgelibrary.org
Metuchen Library Wills, Estate Planning & Probate Seminar will be June 10 at 6:30pmvia Zoom online
Login details upcoming at https://www.metuchenlibrary.org
3. Memorial Dayis a federal holiday in the United Statesfor remembering the people who died while serving in the country's armed forces
Memorial Day is not to be confused with Veterans Day; Memorial Day is a day of remembering the men and women who diedwhile serving, while Veterans Day celebrates the service of all U.S. military veterans.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memorial_Day
Memorial Day is a solemn day of mourning, a sacred day of remembrance to honor those who paid the ultimate price for our freedoms.
Unfortunately in 2020, parades we participated in 2019 had to be cancelled. We still need to remember with sincere respect those who paid the price for our freedoms; we need to keep in sacred remembrance those who died serving their country. We need to never let them be forgotten. On Memorial Day we need to stop and pay with sincere conviction our respects for those who died protecting and preserving the freedoms we enjoy, for we owe those honored dead more than we can ever repay
4. Roadside statements inadmissible were improper roadside stop State v. Alessi (A-41/42-17)
The Court considers whether the police may pull over a driver for questioning in furtherance of an investigation without reasonable suspicion that she committed a crime or traffic violation.
HELD: The circumstances of this case do not legitimize the stop. Law enforcement must have reasonable and articulable suspicion of a traffic violation, the commission of a crime, or unlawful activity before executing a traffic stop. Accordingly, the roadside statement given by defendant during the unlawful stop should have been excluded at trial, and the Court affirms the Appellate Division's reversal of her convictions for hindering apprehension and false reporting. Because defendant's roadside statement permeated the trial, severely affecting her credibility and ability to mount a defense to the separate burglary charge, that conviction is reversed as well.
1. Courts evaluate the totality of the circumstances to determine whether an officer had a reasonable suspicion that justified an investigatory stop. The Court reviews cases in which it has determined the constitutionality of a stop where the officer's suspicion was not based on an observed traffic violation and notes that those decisions reveal a highly fact-intensive inquiry.
2. Based solely on the knowledge available to Donaruma at the time he pulled defendant over, he could not have reasonably suspected defendant participated in a crime. Donaruma testified on remand that defendant was not the target of his investigation or even a suspect at the time he stopped her. Donaruma stopped defendant to develop his investigation into Izzo. From an objective perspective, defendant's actions on the post office surveillance footage were not reasonably more consistent with guilt than innocence. That defendant did not respond to the officers' calls or visits does not alter that conclusion; as the trial judge noted, there was no testimony that Donaruma became suspicious due to defendant's elusive behavior. A law enforcement officer cannot use an automobile stop merely for the purpose of a police interview and without observing a traffic violation or having a reasonable suspicion of other criminal activity. Because the stop in this case was unconstitutional, the Court does not address defendant's additional argument that the scope of the stop was unreasonable.
3. Courts will not exclude evidence sufficiently attenuated from the taint of an unconstitutional stop. The Court reviews the three factors in an attenuation analysis and determines defendant's statement to Donaruma was not so attenuated from the initial stop as to avoid application of the exclusionary rule. Without that statement, defendant's convictions for false reporting and hindering apprehension cannot stand.
4. Finally, the Court reviews the application of defendant's roadside statement to her burglary charge. Defendant's guilt hinged on whether she had permission to enter Izzo's truck. If the jury believed defendant's version of events over Izzo's, then it would not have found defendant guilty of burglary. Yet, this was unlikely in light of the State's exploitation of contradictions between defendant's roadside statement and the statement she gave later, with counsel present. Additional facts in the record support defendant's claim that she had permission to enter the truck, and Izzo had his own credibility issues. Had the trial court initially excluded defendant's roadside statement, defendant's credibility would have remained intact because the State would never have had the opportunity to highlight the falsehoods she told Donaruma. The admission of the roadside statement was "clearly capable of producing an unjust result," R. 2:10-2, because there is reasonable doubt as to whether the jury would have found defendant guilty of burglary in its absence. The Court does not pass judgment on the merits of whether defendant burgled Izzo's truck.
The judgment of the Appellate Division reversing defendant's convictions of hindering apprehension and false reporting is AFFIRMED, defendant's conviction for burglary is REVERSED, and the matter is REMANDED.
Friends and clients can help us by adding a review on Google https://www.google.com/#q=Kenneth+Vercammen&lrd=0x89c3c87ea72dbd57:0xdbd3622846daeec9,1
Liking us on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/Kenneth-Vercammen-Associates-PC-Law-Office-Edison-NJ-08817-149816077985/
Help us with a review on Yelp https://www.yelp.com/biz/kenneth-vercammen-and-assoc-attorney-at-law-edison
Help us with a review on Avvo https://www.avvo.com/attorneys/08817-nj-kenneth-vercammen-571594.html
Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, 2053 Woodbridge Avenue, Edison, NJ 08817
SafeUnsubscribe™ {recipient's email}
Forward this email | Update Profile | About our service provider
Sent by vercammennews@njlaws.com in collaboration with
Constant Contact
Try email marketing for free today!
1. The Living Will and Being Prepared in the Time of COVID
2. Woodbridge Library & Metuchen Library Wills, Estate Planning & Probate Seminar upcoming on zoom
3. Memorial Day
4. Roadside statements inadmissible were improper roadside stop State v. Alessi
1. The Living Will and Being Prepared in the Time of COVID
The Home News Tribune on May 12 had an excellent article on End of Life directives in Living Wills. This is a challenging time. There are many things that are out of our control. But there are some things we can do to help us be prepared - both for ourselves and the people we care about. Here are three important things each of us can do, right now, to be prepared.
Pick your person to be your health care decision maker
Choose a health care decision maker (often known as a proxy, agent, or health care power of attorney) [usually spouse or child] - a person who will make medical decisions for you if you become too sick to make them for yourself.
Have a talk with your health care decision maker to make sure they know what matters most to you. [usually spouse or child]
Phone calls or video chats are good if you don't live with that person.
Source https://theconversationproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/tcpcovid19guide.pdf
Have a Living Will prepared.
Talk about what matters most to you
Talk with your important people and decision maker about what matters most.
Think about what you would want if you became seriously ill with COVID-19
People who are older or have chronic medical conditions are more likely to become very sick if they get COVID-19. Some will recover with hospital care, but even with ventilator support many will die. Think about what you would want if you became very sick at this time:
© [2020] The Conversation Project Source https://theconversationproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/tcpcovid19guide.pdf
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
Who would you want to make medical decisions for you if you were unable to make them for yourself?
Ahealth care proxy (also called a health care agent or Power of Attorney for Health Care) is the person you choose to make health care decisions
for you if you're too sick to make them for yourself . Your proxy can talk with your doctors, consult your medical records, and make decisions about tests, procedures, and other treatment .
We cannot overstate the importance of choosing a proxy . Too many people - including half of all the people over 65 who are admitted to a hospital - are unable to make decisions for themselves.
Make sure you have chosen someone you trust to speak for you in case you are unable to speak for yourself!
USEFUL DEFINITIONS
It can be hard to keep track of the various names that are used - both for the PERSONyou choose and the DOCUMENT you fill out. Here's the gist:
Names for the PERSON you choose:
Health care proxy: The person you choose to make decisions about your medical care if you become unable to make them for yourself (My brother is my health care proxy.)
Health care agent: Same as above (My brother is my health care agent.)
Source https://theconversationproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/tcpcovid19guide.pdf
"It's always too soon, until it's too late."
Up until age 18, your parent or legal guardian usually serves as your proxy . But once you turn 18, your parents are no longer your automatic health care proxy .So everyone age 18 or older should complete a health care proxy form - even if they're perfectly healthy. If you're over 18 and haven't yet chosen a proxy, the time is now!
It's good to review your choice of proxy at the start of each decade - when you turn 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70...
Review your Living Will:
When you get married or divorced
When you have children
When you become eligible for Medicare
When you are going on a major trip
When you are newly diagnosed with a serious illness
Source https://theconversationproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/tcpcovid19guide.pdf
WHO might be a good choice to be your proxy?
Mother/Father Spouse/Partner Son/Daughter Sister/Brother Friend
It's generally advisable not to name two people to serve as co-proxies - because if they disagree, the situation can become complicated.
Sometimes it is difficult for a partner or spouse to be a proxy.
For example, they may find it too difficult to agree to ending treatment for their loved one, even when you have made your wishes very clear . In this case, it might be wiser to choose someone else .
Institute for Healthcare Improvement www.ihi.org www.theconversationproject.org
2. Woodbridge Library Wills, Estate Planning & Probate Seminar upcoming on zoom
June 15, 2020 at 7pm is now a Live on Zoom event
Login Details upcoming at https://woodbridgelibrary.org
Metuchen Library Wills, Estate Planning & Probate Seminar will be June 10 at 6:30pmvia Zoom online
Login details upcoming at https://www.metuchenlibrary.org
3. Memorial Dayis a federal holiday in the United Statesfor remembering the people who died while serving in the country's armed forces
Memorial Day is not to be confused with Veterans Day; Memorial Day is a day of remembering the men and women who diedwhile serving, while Veterans Day celebrates the service of all U.S. military veterans.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memorial_Day
Memorial Day is a solemn day of mourning, a sacred day of remembrance to honor those who paid the ultimate price for our freedoms.
Unfortunately in 2020, parades we participated in 2019 had to be cancelled. We still need to remember with sincere respect those who paid the price for our freedoms; we need to keep in sacred remembrance those who died serving their country. We need to never let them be forgotten. On Memorial Day we need to stop and pay with sincere conviction our respects for those who died protecting and preserving the freedoms we enjoy, for we owe those honored dead more than we can ever repay
4. Roadside statements inadmissible were improper roadside stop State v. Alessi (A-41/42-17)
The Court considers whether the police may pull over a driver for questioning in furtherance of an investigation without reasonable suspicion that she committed a crime or traffic violation.
HELD: The circumstances of this case do not legitimize the stop. Law enforcement must have reasonable and articulable suspicion of a traffic violation, the commission of a crime, or unlawful activity before executing a traffic stop. Accordingly, the roadside statement given by defendant during the unlawful stop should have been excluded at trial, and the Court affirms the Appellate Division's reversal of her convictions for hindering apprehension and false reporting. Because defendant's roadside statement permeated the trial, severely affecting her credibility and ability to mount a defense to the separate burglary charge, that conviction is reversed as well.
1. Courts evaluate the totality of the circumstances to determine whether an officer had a reasonable suspicion that justified an investigatory stop. The Court reviews cases in which it has determined the constitutionality of a stop where the officer's suspicion was not based on an observed traffic violation and notes that those decisions reveal a highly fact-intensive inquiry.
2. Based solely on the knowledge available to Donaruma at the time he pulled defendant over, he could not have reasonably suspected defendant participated in a crime. Donaruma testified on remand that defendant was not the target of his investigation or even a suspect at the time he stopped her. Donaruma stopped defendant to develop his investigation into Izzo. From an objective perspective, defendant's actions on the post office surveillance footage were not reasonably more consistent with guilt than innocence. That defendant did not respond to the officers' calls or visits does not alter that conclusion; as the trial judge noted, there was no testimony that Donaruma became suspicious due to defendant's elusive behavior. A law enforcement officer cannot use an automobile stop merely for the purpose of a police interview and without observing a traffic violation or having a reasonable suspicion of other criminal activity. Because the stop in this case was unconstitutional, the Court does not address defendant's additional argument that the scope of the stop was unreasonable.
3. Courts will not exclude evidence sufficiently attenuated from the taint of an unconstitutional stop. The Court reviews the three factors in an attenuation analysis and determines defendant's statement to Donaruma was not so attenuated from the initial stop as to avoid application of the exclusionary rule. Without that statement, defendant's convictions for false reporting and hindering apprehension cannot stand.
4. Finally, the Court reviews the application of defendant's roadside statement to her burglary charge. Defendant's guilt hinged on whether she had permission to enter Izzo's truck. If the jury believed defendant's version of events over Izzo's, then it would not have found defendant guilty of burglary. Yet, this was unlikely in light of the State's exploitation of contradictions between defendant's roadside statement and the statement she gave later, with counsel present. Additional facts in the record support defendant's claim that she had permission to enter the truck, and Izzo had his own credibility issues. Had the trial court initially excluded defendant's roadside statement, defendant's credibility would have remained intact because the State would never have had the opportunity to highlight the falsehoods she told Donaruma. The admission of the roadside statement was "clearly capable of producing an unjust result," R. 2:10-2, because there is reasonable doubt as to whether the jury would have found defendant guilty of burglary in its absence. The Court does not pass judgment on the merits of whether defendant burgled Izzo's truck.
The judgment of the Appellate Division reversing defendant's convictions of hindering apprehension and false reporting is AFFIRMED, defendant's conviction for burglary is REVERSED, and the matter is REMANDED.
Friends and clients can help us by adding a review on Google https://www.google.com/#q=Kenneth+Vercammen&lrd=0x89c3c87ea72dbd57:0xdbd3622846daeec9,1
Liking us on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/Kenneth-Vercammen-Associates-PC-Law-Office-Edison-NJ-08817-149816077985/
Help us with a review on Yelp https://www.yelp.com/biz/kenneth-vercammen-and-assoc-attorney-at-law-edison
Help us with a review on Avvo https://www.avvo.com/attorneys/08817-nj-kenneth-vercammen-571594.html
Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, 2053 Woodbridge Avenue, Edison, NJ 08817
SafeUnsubscribe™ {recipient's email}
Forward this email | Update Profile | About our service provider
Sent by vercammennews@njlaws.com in collaboration with
Constant Contact
Try email marketing for free today!
