Q: If i was charged with 3 DUI's am I able to get one removed to get my Driver's License back in the state of NJ

A: to "Remove" a dwi someone would have to have an attorney file a motion in the court the vacate the guilty plea or for other post conviction relief

The Five Year Post Conviction Limit can be Relaxed in DWI. State v. Bringhurst 401 NJ Super. 421 (App. Div. 2008)

The court concluded that post-conviction relief (PCR) petitions brought pursuant to State v. Laurick, 120 N.J. 1, cert. denied, 498 U.S. 967, 111 S. Ct. 429, 112 L. Ed. 2d 413 (1990), must comply with Rule 7:10-2, and are subject to the five-year limit contained in Rule 7:10-2 (g)(2). However, those time limits may be relaxed to prevent an injustice. Because a Laurick PCR cannot be brought until there is a second or subsequent DWI conviction, the time bar should not mechanically be applied to deny the petition. However, to obtain the benefit of relaxation of the time limit, a defendant must put forth a prima facie case for relief in his petition itself.

In Bringhurst, where defendant's prior, uncounseled conviction was allegedly rendered ten years earlier, Bringhurst’s fact pattern failed to put forth a prima facie case for relief. Therefore, its denial was appropriate. However, in Pathak, he does supply a certification of facts.

DWI defendant entitled to step down based on uncounseled prior plea. State v Conroy 397 NJ Super. 324 (App Div decided January 9, 2008)

The question presented is whether a defendant, who has had three prior convictions for DWI, was entitled to the benefit of the ten-year step-down provision of N.J.S.A. 39:4-50(a)(3) on a fourth conviction, where the first conviction was entered by way of an uncounseled plea. The court answered the question in the affirmative, determining that when defendant appeared before the Law Division he stood as a third offender, not a fourth offender, for the limited purpose of the trial court imposing a jail sentence under the enhanced sentencing provision of the DWI statute. Laurick continued.

Judge Gilroy wrote:

“Defendant appeals from that part of the October 27, 2006, order of the Law Division, which sentenced him to 180 days of incarceration as a third offender under the Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) statute, N.J.S.A. 39:4-50(a). The question presented on appeal is whether a defendant, who has had three prior convictions for DWI, is entitled to the benefit of the ten-year "step-down" provision of N.J.S.A. 39:4-50(a)(3) on a fourth conviction, where the first conviction was entered by way of an uncounseled plea. We answer the question in the affirmative; reverse that part of the October 27, 2006, order sentencing defendant to 180 days of incarceration; and remand the matter to the trial court to re-sentence defendant as a second offender under the DWI statute.

The facts are not disputed. Defendant was convicted of DWI on October 12, 1982; April 17, 1990; and August 1, 1995. He was not represented by counsel when he pled guilty to the first offense, but was represented by counsel when he pled guilty to the second and third offenses. Because less than ten years had elapsed between the first and second offenses, as well as between the second and third offenses, defendant never previously received the benefit of the step-down provision. On November 27, 1995, defendant was arrested for DWI and other motor vehicle offenses. On May 17, 2006, defendant pled guilty to DWI; driving while suspended, N.J.S.A. 39:3-40; and falsifying his driver's license application, N.J.S.A. 39:3-37. Other charges were merged or dismissed. At sentencing, defendant had argued that although he should be sentenced as a third offender for purposes of fines and license suspension, he should only be sentenced as a second offender for purposes of incarceration. Defendant contended that his uncounseled conviction in 1982 could not be used to enhance a subsequent custodial sentence, citing State v. Laurick, 120 N.J. 1 (1990), and that he was entitled to the benefit of the step-down provision.