a stated time and place, “shall be signed and issued only by a law enforcement officer or the judge, municipal court administrator or deputy court administrator of the court having territorial jurisdiction.” R. 7:2 — 1(b)(2) (emphasis added). Because a citizen has no authority to issue a summons, Rule 7:2-2(a)(l) requires a judge or judicial officer to determine that “there is probable cause to believe that an offense was committed and the defendant has committed it” before a summons can be issued on a citizen complaint. Conversely, when a law enforcement officer makes a complaint, as in this case, “[a] summons ... may be issued by [that] officer without a finding by a judicial officer of probable cause.” R. 7:2 — 2(a)(2); see also Gonzalez, supra, 114 N.J. at 605-06, 556 A2d at 329-30 (<HOLDING>). In sum, the Uniform Traffic Ticket, as
holding that a determination of probable cause does not bar a state law malicious prosecution claim where the claim is based on the police officers supplying false information to establish probable cause holding that the courts determination of whether an officer had probable cause for an arrest is an independent and objective determination and an officers own subjective reason for the arrest is irrelevant recognizing that where authorized party consents to search neither a warrant nor probable cause is necessary holding that neither public policy nor state or federal constitutions require independent determination of probable cause to support traffic ticket issued by law enforcement officer holding that probable cause determination presents a mixed question of law and fact