The New Jersey Supreme Court is reviewing a petition from Municipal Court Judge Wilfredo Benitez to end his nearly nine-year disqualification from hearing driving while intoxicated cases, according to an order filed Oct. 23, 2025.
Benitez has been barred from presiding over DWI matters since Nov. 12, 2016, under Directive #04-09 and multiple court orders. His current motion asks the court to reconsider its April 14, 2025 order that denied his most recent application for reinstatement. The judge requests "clear findings" if the court continues his disqualification.
The disqualification stems from Benitez's own DWI arrest and subsequent misconduct that violated judicial conduct standards. Court records show the judge made multiple attempts to regain his authority to hear DWI cases over the years, each meeting resistance from the state's highest court.
Benitez first sought removal of his DWI disqualification after being acquitted of the criminal charges that initially triggered the restriction. On April 10, 2018, the court denied that request and ordered the disqualification to continue pending disciplinary proceedings before the Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct.
The judge made a second attempt during his disciplinary case, asking the court to lift the DWI hearing restriction when imposing any discipline. However, the court's Sept. 6, 2018 order censuring Benitez did not remove the disqualification.
The disciplinary proceedings revealed troubling details about Benitez's conduct during his DWI arrest. According to court records, a recording of the arrest showed that the judge repeatedly tried to leverage his judicial position for preferential treatment. The recording captured Benitez informing state troopers multiple times that he was a judge and asking them to extend "courtesy" to him.
The misconduct escalated beyond inappropriate requests for special treatment. Court documents indicate Benitez confronted the arresting officers with inappropriate language and made threats against them. The censure order specifically noted that he threatened the troopers, with the court record showing he said "I'm gonna f***" before the text was cut off in the available documentation.
These violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct formed the basis for the court's 2018 censure. The disciplinary action acknowledged that Benitez's behavior during the arrest fundamentally compromised his ability to fairly adjudicate similar cases involving impaired driving charges.
The long-standing disqualification raises questions about judicial accountability and rehabilitation. While Benitez was acquitted of the underlying criminal charges, the court has maintained that his conduct during the arrest created an ongoing conflict that prevents him from fairly hearing DWI cases.
Directive #04-09, which governs the disqualification, reflects the court system's recognition that judges who have been involved in similar legal situations may lack the appearance of impartiality necessary for fair adjudication. The directive ensures that defendants in DWI cases appear before judges who have not been personally involved in comparable circumstances.
The current petition represents Benitez's continued effort to restore his full judicial authority. His request for "clear findings" suggests frustration with previous denials that may have lacked detailed explanations for the continued disqualification.
Municipal courts handle the majority of DWI cases in New Jersey, making these restrictions significant for both the affected judge and court operations. The disqualification limits Benitez's caseload and requires administrative adjustments to ensure DWI matters are assigned to other judges.
The timing of the current motion, filed nearly seven years after the censure and more than eight years since the initial disqualification, indicates the judge's persistent belief that sufficient time has passed to warrant reinstatement. However, the court's April 2025 denial suggests continued concerns about allowing Benitez to preside over cases involving charges similar to those he faced.
The case highlights broader issues within the judicial system about when, if ever, judges who have faced legal troubles should regain full authority to hear similar cases. The balance between judicial rehabilitation and maintaining public confidence in the court system remains a central tension in such proceedings.
The Supreme Court of New Jersey has not indicated when it will rule on Benitez's latest petition. The matter is docketed as M-1149 in the September Term 2024, suggesting it has been under consideration for several months.
The outcome will determine whether Benitez can resume hearing DWI cases after nearly a decade of restrictions, or whether the disqualification will continue indefinitely. The court's eventual decision may also provide the "clear findings" the judge has requested, offering more detailed reasoning for whatever action the court takes.