Requires order of restitution to child of parent or guardian killed by drunk driver.
Summary
Assembly Bill 340 amends New Jersey’s vehicular homicide statute to add a new restitution requirement when a drunk-driving death leaves behind a minor child. In addition to any restitution already available under current law, a court would be required to order a defendant convicted under the drunk-driving provision of reckless vehicular homicide to pay restitution to a minor child if the deceased victim was the child’s parent or guardian. The bill directs courts to consider the child’s loss of financial support until age 18, or age 21 if the child is disabled, and requires that any restitution award cover at least five years of support loss.
The bill does not change the underlying criminal offense structure for death by auto or vessel, but it adds a victim-compensation component to sentencing in drunk-driving homicide cases. It ties the new restitution obligation specifically to cases involving intoxicated operation under N.J.S.A. 39:4-50 and applies only where the death is of a parent or guardian of a minor child. The measure takes effect immediately if enacted.
Impact
A340 would amend N.J.S.2C:11-5, New Jersey’s death-by-auto-or-vessel statute, by creating a mandatory restitution category for minor children of parents or guardians killed by a drunk driver. This would expand sentencing consequences in qualifying vehicular homicide cases and require courts to assess the child’s financial-support loss as part of restitution. The bill would affect defendants convicted under the intoxicated-driving portion of the statute, as well as surviving minor children and, in some cases, disabled children up to age 21.
Sentiment
The available bill materials suggest a strongly sympathetic and punitive policy rationale, focused on helping children who lose a parent or guardian in a drunk-driving crash. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no documented opposition or support from legislative debate in the supplied materials. The bill’s framing and sponsor statement indicate a generally pro-victim, anti-drunk-driving sentiment.
Contention
The main policy issue is whether restitution should be mandatory in these cases and how broadly financial support losses should be calculated. Potential concerns could include the defendant’s ability to pay, the scope of restitution over a child’s remaining minority, and whether the new requirement duplicates existing restitution authority. The bill text itself limits the new obligation to drunk-driving deaths involving a parent or guardian and sets a minimum five-year restitution period, which may be viewed as both a safeguard for children and a point of debate over sentencing severity.