Full Breakdown
Judge Denies Motion to Dismiss Charges in Fatal Gaudreau Brothers Crash
5/12/2026, 6:21:45 AM
The Fatal Crash and Criminal Charges
On August 29, 2024, Johnny (31) and Matthew Gaudreau (29) were cycling on County Route 551 in Oldmans Township when Sean Higgins, 45, driving a Jeep Grand Cherokee, entered the opposite lane and struck them, killing both. Higgins faces aggravated manslaughter, reckless vehicular homicide and other charges that could total a 72-year sentence.
Legal Proceedings and Judicial Rulings
At a pre-trial hearing on May 11, 2026, Superior Court Judge Michael Silvanio rejected Higgins’s motion to dismiss the indictment, finding no intentional misrepresentation to the grand jury. The case returns to court on June 16, 2026.
Blood-Alcohol Evidence Dispute
Higgins’s lawyers contend the hospital blood draw clotted, forcing a serum analysis and a conversion factor that inflated the reported .087 % BAC above New Jersey’s .08 % limit. They argue the true level was .075 %. Prosecutors counter that the forensic lab followed accepted procedures, disclosed the conversion, and that the .087 % result is reliable.
Official Statements
Assistant prosecutor Michael Mestern said the BAC evidence is credible and unmisleading. Defense attorney Richard Klineburger urged a new grand-jury presentation of proper evidence. Judge Silvanio emphasized the jury’s role as the ultimate fact-finder.
Criticism & Opposition
The defense criticizes the handling of the blood sample, the clotting issue, and the lack of clear explanation of the serum-to-whole-blood conversion to the grand jury.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
Prosecutors cite a .087 % BAC from a serum test; defense asserts the sample was clotted and the true level was .075 %, leaving the exact testing method unresolved.
Verbatim Quotes
- “The argument is the connection between the fact that something went wrong, something was improper with either the handling or the drawing of this blood that caused the clotting, and when it went to the forensic lab and there was an extra step the state is now claiming was taken, there's no way we can tie that back to which sample was utilized,” — Richard Klineburger, Defense Attorney
- “There is credible evidence to support the claim that there was a BAC level of .087%. That was presented to the grand jury. There was no half-truths, there was no misleading or misdirection,” — Michael Mestern, Assistant Prosecutor
- “Judge, I'm not asking you to throw this case out for my client to walk free and be not guilty, I'm asking that the grand jury be presented with the proper evidence. This is not a huge chore on the part of the state.” — Richard Klineburger, Defense Attorney
- “A jury at trial is the ultimate fact-finder and is the best positioned party to weigh conflicting evidence, including expert testimony regarding BAC levels,” — Michael Silvanio, Judge
What’s Next
The case is scheduled for a further hearing on June 16, 2026, where the defense may introduce expert testimony on the BAC analysis before the trial proceeds later in 2026.
