Juvenile Justice

STATE in INTEREST OF M.M., a juvenile. resitution hearing available

2011-11-19T19:18:00.000-08:00

STATE in

INTEREST OF M.M., a juvenile. resitution hearing available

________________________________________________________________

August 12, 2011

Submitted April 4, 2011 — Decided

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-2446-09T2

Before Judges Alvarez and Ostrer.

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part, Monmouth County, Docket No. FJ-13-2429-09.

Yvonne Smith Segars, Public Defender, attorney for appellant M.M. (Monique Moyse, Designated Counsel, on the brief).

Peter E. Warshaw, Jr., Monmouth County Prosecutor, attorney for respondent State of New Jersey (Carey J. Huff, Assistant Prosecutor, of counsel and on the brief).

PER CURIAM

Marc Miller[1] appeals from a juvenile adjudication of delinquency. The Family Part determined that Miller committed a theft of jewelry valued between $500 and $75,000, contrary to N.J.S.A. 2C:20-3. On December 3, 2009, after the juvenile waived preparation of a pre-disposition report, the court sentenced Marc to one year probation, a substance abuse evaluation, mandatory fees and penalties. As a condition of probation, Marc was ordered to pay the victim's insurer $5000 in restitution. In a later order, the court set a payment schedule of $50 a month for one year, and $100 a month thereafter.

We briefly summarize the salient facts supported by the trial evidence. The stolen jewelry was the property of Marilyn Starr, the grandmother of Marc's former girlfriend, Emily Caine (Emily). The Starr household included Starr and her husband, their daughter Rochelle Caine (Caine) and her husband, and Emily and her sibling. Emily and Marc were friends as pre-teens and had dated for two years before breaking up in September 2008. Thereafter, until October 2008, Marc was still often present in the Starr home. Starr treated him as a "grandson."

During the period when the jewelry was found to be missing, Marc enjoyed unfettered access to the victim's bedroom area where she stored her jewelry, and the kitchen, where she often removed her rings and placed them in a cup while cooking. Marc had expressed curiosity about the jewelry and discussed its value with the victim. Barry Chalmers, a friend of Marc's, testified that Marc asked him to take him to a pawnshop to pawn items of jewelry. Barry admitted to Caine that he had taken Marc to the pawnshop and was able to describe some of the pieces of jewelry. Caine also testified that Marc apologized to her for claiming that Barry stole the jewelry.

Police initially presented the pawnshop owner with photographs of Marc, and no one else.[2] Without disclosing the purpose of his inquiry, the officer asked the owner if he recognized the person depicted. The shop owner identified Marc as someone who previously had been to his shop on more than one occasion to sell jewelry. In a later interview about Marc, the police officer presented the shop owner with a drawing of a bracelet decorated with a horse image, one of the distinctive items that Starr claimed was stolen. The officer asked the shop owner if he recalled seeing a bracelet like that. The shop owner recalled that Marc had sold such a bracelet.

Marc raises the following points on appeal:

POINT I

THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN ADMITTING EVIDENCE OF THE IMPERMISSIBLY SUGGESTIVE OUT-OF-COURT IDENTIFICATION OF DEFENDANT BY ELISHA REESE AND THE RESULTING TAINTED IN-COURT IDENTIFICATION, THEREBY DENYING DEFENDANT DUE PROCESS AND A FAIR TRIAL. (U.S. CONST. AMENDS. VI, XIV; N.J. CONST. (1947), ART. I, pars. 1 and 10).

POINT II

THE LOWER COURT ERRONEOUSLY ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE PREJUDICIAL HEARSAY STATEMENTS WHICH WERE NOT ADMISSIBLE UNDER N.J.R.E. 803(C)(3).

POINT III

THE LOWER COURT FAILED TO CONDUCT A RESTITUTION HEARING TO ASSURE THAT M.M., A JUVENILE, COULD PAY $5000.00 IN A ONE-YEAR TIME PERIOD.[3]

We have reviewed these points in light of the record and the applicable law. We find no basis to upset the adjudication of delinquency based on the court's evidentiary rulings. However, we do agree that there was insufficient evidence in the record to support the court's order of restitution. We will address Marc's arguments in turn.

In determining whether an identification should be excluded, under the current standard,[4] a court must "first . . . ascertain whether the identification procedure was impermissibly suggestive, and, if so, whether the impermissibly suggestive procedure was nevertheless reliable." State v. Herrera, 187 N.J. 493, 503-04 (2006). A court must consider the "totality of the circumstances" and weigh, against the corrupting effect of the suggestive procedure, five factors: "'the opportunity of the witness to view the criminal at the time of the crime, the witness’s degree of attention, the accuracy of his prior description of the criminal, the level of certainty demonstrated at the confrontation, and the time between the crime and the confrontation.'" Id. at 506-07 (quoting Manson v. Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98, 114, 97 S. Ct. 2243, 2253, 53 L. Ed. 2d 140, 154 (1977)). A trial court's reliability finding is entitled to great weight, and shall not be upset if supported by sufficient credible evidence. State v. Adams, 194 N.J. 186, 203 (2008).

The juvenile argues that the presentation of photographs of him alone to the pawnshop owner at the first interview was impermissibly suggestive. He also argues that it was impermissibly suggestive for police to request an opportunity to discuss "the case" involving Marc, to present the drawing of the horse bracelet, and to ask whether Marc had sold that bracelet.

Although single-photograph displays may be viewed generally with some suspicion, a court may find under particular circumstances that they are not impermissibly suggestive. Manson v. Brathwaite, supra, 432 U.S. at 116, 97 S. Ct. at 2254, 53 L. Ed. 2d at 155. In this case, there was sufficient evidence in the record for the trial court to conclude that, under the totality of the circumstances, presenting only Marc's photographs was not impermissibly suggestive.

The shop owner was not a victim of a crime and did not have the interest of a crime victim in securing an arrest. Although the shop owner might reasonably have suspected that a crime had been committed simply based on the police inquiries, the police did not disclose their suspicions about Marc. In a significant sense, then, the shop owner did not identify a suspect at all; he simply stated that he recognized an individual.

In United States v. Jones, 652 F. Supp. 1561, 1570 (S.D.N.Y. 1986), the court persuasively distinguished between recognition and identification. As in this case, police asked a

disinterested third-party witness if she recognized a person without disclosing the purpose of the inquiry.

Niemeyer [the investigating officer] simply showed Crouch [the third-party witness] a photograph and asked her if she recognized the subject for any reason. Crouch was free to answer "yes" or "no." The fact that she was shown only one photograph in no way "suggests," that is to say, tends to elicit, an affirmative response. We deal here with recognition in its most general sense. There is a quantum difference between that process and identification for a particular purpose, such as the identification of a perpetrator by his victim.

[Ibid.]

The court also found it inconsequential that the employee likely surmised that the person depicted was a possible suspect. "If anything, Crouch's awareness of Niemeyer's general purpose would likely cause her to be careful before saying she recognized the man in the photograph." Ibid. We agree with that reasoning.

Nor was it impermissibly suggestive for the police, at a second interview, after announcing a desire to discuss Marc's case, to present the drawing of the horse bracelet and inquire whether the shop owner recognized the item. The shop owner had already recognized Marc as someone who had sold jewelry. The identification at the second interview focused on the jewelry, not the person. However, the limitations on impermissibly suggestive identification procedures, grounded in notions of due process, generally pertain to the identification of people, not things. State v. Delgado, 188 N.J. 48, 66-67 (2006).[5]

Moreover, there was sufficient evidence in the record to support the trial court's finding that the shop owner's identification was reliable. Among other factors, he had the opportunity to view Marc face-to-face in his own business establishment, and transacted business with him recently on multiple occasions. See State v. Adams, supra, 194 N.J. at 204 (discussing factors that should be considered in determining reliability). In sum, we discern no error in the admission of the shop owner's identification of the juvenile.

II.

The juvenile also argues that the trial court erroneously admitted into evidence three hearsay statements: (1) that certain young people who visited the Starr household said they were looking for money from Marc; (2) that certain people said that Marc had committed the theft; and (3) that certain people said that Marc had accused Barry of committing the theft. The trial court's evidentiary rulings are entitled to substantial deference. State v. Morton, 155 N.J. 383, 453 (1998).

Starr testified that certain young persons came to her house stating that they were looking for Marc, they wanted money from him, and they intended to harm him. We discern no error in the trial court's ruling that these statements were admissible because they related to the declarants' "then existing state of mind," specifically their "intent, plan, motive, [or] design" in going to the Starr home in search of Marc. See N.J.R.E. 803(c)(3). The statements were relevant because they tended to establish a motive by Marc to commit the thefts. They also tended to rebut the defense suggestion that the theft may have been committed by one of the many other young people who visited the Starr household. In any event, the statements' admission into evidence was harmless, as the court did not rely on them in its detailed findings of fact. See State v. Macon, 57 N.J. 325, 340 (1971) (describing harmless error).

The court also did not err in admitting (a) Barry's testimony describing Caine's out-of-court statement that "everyone was telling her that it was [Marc Miller]" who committed the theft; and (b) Starr's testimony about Barry's out-of-court statements that he wanted to clear his name, in the face of Marc's reported allegation that Barry had committed the theft. The out-of-court statements were not admitted for the truth of the assertion that Marc was alleging that Barry had committed the theft, or that other people were alleging that Marc committed the thefts. They were admitted to explain why Barry came forward to disclose his role in pawning the jewelry.

Moreover, defense counsel did not object to Barry's testimony regarding Caine's out-of-court statement about accusations against Marc. Also, by asking Starr an open-ended question about what she said to Barry in a certain conversation, defense counsel opened the door to the out-of-court statements about Marc's reported allegations against Barry. Finally, Caine testified that Marc admitted to her directly that he had publicly accused Barry of committing the thefts, and Marc apologized for doing so. Marc's out-of-court statements were unquestionably admissible. N.J.R.E. 803(b)(1).

III.

Lastly, we agree that the record lacks sufficient support for the court's order of restitution in the amount of $5000. Marc challenges his ability to pay, and argues that a hearing was required on that issue.

The court was authorized to require the juvenile to pay restitution. N.J.S.A. 2A:4A-43b(9). Due process generally requires a court to consider a defendant's ability to pay. State ex rel. D.G.W., 70 N.J. 488, 501, 505 (1976); State v. Orji, 277 N.J. Super. 582, 589 (App. Div. 1994); see also State ex rel. R.V., 280 N.J. Super. 118, 123 (App. Div. 1995) (stating that a court must consider a juvenile's present and future anticipated ability to pay before ordering restitution); cf. N.J.S.A. 2C:44-2c(2) (stating that a court shall set the amount of restitution to be paid by an adult offender "consistent with the defendant's ability to pay").

The State bears the burden to establish the restitution amount. State v. Martinez, 392 N.J. Super. 307, 319 (App. Div. 2007) (stating that the prosecution must prove by a preponderance of the evidence the amount of restitution to be ordered, in an adult prosecution); see also Cannel, New Jersey Criminal Code Annotated, comment on N.J.S.A. 2C:44-2 (2011) ("In determining the amount of restitution ordered the burden remains on the prosecution . . . ."). The Code of Juvenile Justice bars an order of restitution if the juvenile "reasonably satisfies the court" that he or she lacks the present or future ability to pay. N.J.S.A. 2A:4A-43b(9). Yet, we do not construe that provision to place the initial burden on a juvenile to disprove the appropriateness of a restitution order.

In determining a juvenile's appropriate disposition, a court must weigh, among other factors, the juvenile's "social characteristics and needs," and the juvenile's "social history as deemed appropriate." N.J.S.A. 2A:4A-43a(6), (8). The court's discretion is also informed by the rehabilitative purposes of the Code. State ex rel. D.A., 385 N.J. Super. 411, 416 (App. Div.), certif. denied, 188 N.J. 355 (2006). Depending on a juvenile's personal and family finances, a restitution order can promote rehabilitation, undermine it, or have no effect. State ex rel. D.G.W., supra, 70 N.J. at 508; see also State v. Newman, 132 N.J. 159, 173 (1993) (stating that an unaffordable restitution obligation "would frustrate the goal of rehabilitation."). Therefore, to make a reasoned restitution decision, a court must have "sufficient details as to the offender's present and probable future ability to repay the damages caused." State ex rel. D.G.W., supra, 70 N.J. at 505.

The State argues that no hearing was necessary because the juvenile did not object to the amount of the victim's damages, nor question his ability to pay. We disagree. Where a defendant did not contest the restitution amount, nor dispute his ability to pay, we have held that a restitution hearing was unnecessary, but we did so in view of ample evidence in the record of his ability to pay, including defense counsel's concession on the record that his client had the funds to pay restitution, and evidence in the presentence report regarding defendant's education, employment, and earning capacity. State v. Orji, supra, 277 N.J. Super. at 589. The record before us contains no similar evidence about Marc's ability to pay, nor did defense counsel affirmatively concede the point.

By contrast, where a restitution order was unsupported by the record, we have held that a hearing was necessary, even though the juvenile, as in this case, did not object to the restitution amount. State ex rel. R.V., supra, 280 N.J. Super. at 121, 124. The trial court in R.V. did not conduct a hearing regarding "how the payment would impact on the . . . juvenile, or his ability to pay and prospects for future employment." Id. at 121. We remanded for a hearing limited to whether the juvenile "presently or in the future will or should be able to pay the amount ordered." Id. at 124.

We do so here as well. The hearing should be summary in nature. State ex rel. D.G.W., supra, 70 N.J. at 506-07. The court shall consider Marc's present and future ability to pay, and the impact of the order on his prospects for rehabilitation.

Affirmed in part and remanded for a restitution hearing consistent with this opinion. Jurisdiction is not retained.

[1] For the reader's convenience, we use pseudonyms for the juvenile and other minors mentioned in the opinion. We also use pseudonyms of related family members of the juveniles, to avoid their identification.

[2] Although the pawnshop owner testified that the officer presented photographs of four individuals, the court credited the officer's testimony that at their first meeting, he presented only photographs of Marc. Sufficient credible evidence in the record supports the court's fact-finding. State v. Scott, 236 N.J. Super. 264, 267 (App. Div. 1989) (sustaining trial court's findings in hearing challenging identification).

[3] This point was not raised in the trial court, as the juvenile did not object to the amount of restitution or his ability to pay. The juvenile's brief should have so noted. See R. 2:6-2(a)(1). However, we choose to address the issue.

[4] The Supreme Court asked a Special Master to review the appropriateness of the current standard. State v. Henderson, No. A-8-08 (Feb. 26, 2009). The Special Master's report in Henderson is available at http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/ pressrel/HENDERSON%20FINAL%20BRIEF%20.PDF%20(00621142).PDF.

[5] Nor do we perceive this to be the "rare and extreme case" where "the degree of suggestiveness of an identification procedure concerning an inanimate object . . . [is] so great as to contravene a defendant's due process rights." Id. at 68 n.13 (quoting Commonwealth v. Spann, 418 N.E.2d 328, 332 (Mass. 1981)) (quotation marks omitted).

2011 Municipal Court College

2011-09-14T15:04:00.001-07:00

2011 Municipal Court College

Mon, Nov. 14, 2011

5:30 PM - 9:00 PM

New Jersey Law Center, New Brunswick

A guide to handling municipal court matters in your practice and a "crash course" designed to build your skills!

This information-packed program is designed for attorneys who do not concentrate in municipal court law, including general practitioners seeking to expand into this practice area & not, novice attorneys looking to create a niche practice. Seasoned municipal court lawyers are certainly more than welcome to join us and brush up on their skills.

You'll "go back to school" to attend 6 half hour segments and panel discussions that will provide you with a working knowledge of municipal court law basics. You'll quickly be able to represent clients in a wide range of matters you would normally have had to refer to others. Gain confidence in your ability to handle municipal court law matters. Make an investment in your legal career and register today!!

Program Agenda:

5:00

Opening

5:35

Initial client interview; getting retained; dealing with the prosecutor –

Kenneth A. Vercammen, Esq

6:05

Driving While Suspended – Stephen D. Williams, Esq.

6:35

Drug Cases and DREs – Norma M. Murgado, Esq.

7:05

Break

7:15

Assault and miscellaneous proceedings – John E. Hogan, Esq.

7:45

DWI/Blood – John Menzel, Esq.

8:15

Alcotest – John Menzel, Esq.; Norma M. Murgado, Esq.

8:45

Q&A and closing comments

9:00

Adjourn

Gain insight and information that will help you represent clients in every aspect of municipal court law, including: • Initial interview getting retained and dealing with the prosecutor • Driving while suspended • Drug cases and DRE • Assault and miscellaneous • DWI - Blood • DWI – Alcotest

KENNETH A. VERCAMMEN, ESQ.

Past Chair, NJSBA Municipal Court Section

Past GP Solo Section Attorney of the Year

2006 NJSBA Municipal Court Practitioner of the Year

K. Vercammen & Associates (Edison)

JOHN MENZEL, ESQ.

Law Offices of John Menzel (Point Pleasant)

NORMA M. MURGADO, ESQ.

Chief Prosecutor (Elizabeth)

Assistant Prosecutor (Woodbridge)

Murgado & Carroll, Esq. (Elizabeth)

STEPHEN D. WILLIAMS, ESQ.

Law Offices of Stephen D. Williams (Flemington)

Who should attend: • Judges & Prosecutors • General practitioners • Criminal law practitioners • Municipal Court law practitioners • Litigators • New attorneys • Members of law enforcement

Includes seminar, 400 page book, CD with over 1,000 pages of forms, dinner, coffee, desert Tuition ranges between $145- $189 depending on NJSBA membership Call Phone: (732)214-8500 Seminar # S962-21594

General Tuition $190.00

2011 Municipal Court College

S96200F1

Tuition Discounts

Enter your "Special Code" for your discount.

Members Co-Sponsoring Sections/Organizations

Save 25% (Special Code: COS)

NJSBA Members

Save 20% (Special Code: NJB)

NJSBA Members YLD

Save 25% (Special Code: YLD)

Recent admittees (past 2 years)

Save 15% (Special Code: YL)

Paralegals

Save 35% (Special Code: PAR)

NJ CLE information: This program has been approved by the Board on Continuing Legal Education of the Supreme Court of New Jersey for 4.0 hours of total CLE credit. Of these, 4.0 qualify as hours of credit toward certification in criminal trial law.

Location: New Jersey Law Center

One Constitution Square

New Brunswick, NJ

732-214-8500

NEW JERSEY INSTITUTE FOR CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION

NJICLE, A Division of the NJSBA NJ State Bar Association

CAN'T ATTEND?

2010 MUNICIPAL COURT COLLEGE

Up to 12 of your 24 New Jersey MCLE credits can be earned via Audio CDs, Webinars & MP3s.

Order your audio package and earn New Jersey MCLE credits at your convenience.

KENNETH VERCAMMEN & ASSOCIATES, PC

ATTORNEY AT LAW

2053 Woodbridge Ave.

Edison, NJ 08817

(Phone) 732-572-0500

(Fax) 732-572-0030

http://www.njicle.com/category.aspx?catid=2115#5908

http://KennethVercammen.com/MUNICIPAL.COURT.COLLEGE.html

STATE OF NEW JERSEY IN THE INTEREST OF A.D., A MINOR A-3720-09T4; A-3721-09T4

2011-06-01T09:21:00.000-07:00

5-9-11 The denial of the state's motion to transfer jurisdiction from the family part to the Law Division is reversed where defendants were 17 years old when they were charged with Chart 1 offenses. Both defendants were just shy of eighteen when they were charged with Chart 1 offenses, including murder. Defendants' claims of duress and renunciation do not negate the existence of probable cause to believe they committed a delinquent act and are insufficient to defeat waiver.

NEW JERSEY DIVISION OF YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES VS. A.R., J.R., W.B., AND J.H. IN THE MATTER OF N.R., I.R., AND J.H. A-3161-10T4

2011-06-01T09:10:00.000-07:00

5-10-11 The undisputed facts revealed that defendant left his ten-

month child to sleep on a twin bed without railings, while a

ten-year old child also slept in the bed, near an operating

radiator; the ten-month old child was found the next morning on

the floor suffering severe burns from the hot radiator. The

trial court found defendant was merely negligent and the child

neither abused nor neglected within the meaning of N.J.S.A. 9:6-

8.21(c). The court granted leave to appeal and reversed,

concluding in its application of the statutory standard, as

interpreted in G.S. v. Dep't of Human Servs., 157 N.J. 161

(1991), that defendant was grossly negligent because "an

ordinary reasonable person" would understand the situation posed

dangerous risks and defendant acted without regard for the

potential serious consequences.

9:6-3. Cruelty and neglect of children; crime of fourth degree; remedies

2011-05-09T11:24:00.000-07:00

9:6-3. Any parent, guardian or person having the care, custody or control of any child, who shall abuse, abandon, be cruel to or neglectful of such child, or any person who shall abuse, be cruel to or neglectful of any child shall be deemed to be guilty of a crime of the fourth degree. If a fine be imposed, the court may direct the same to be paid in whole or in part to the parent, or to the guardian, custodian or trustee of such minor child or children; provided, however, that whenever in the judgment of the court it shall appear to the best interest of the child to place it in the temporary care or custody of a society or corporation, organized or incorporated under the laws of this State, having as one of its objects the prevention of cruelty to children, and the society or corporation is willing to assume such custody and control, the court may postpone sentence and place the child in the custody of such society or corporation, and may place defendant on probation, either with the county probation officers or an officer of the society or corporation to which the child is ordered, and may order the parent, guardian or person having the custody and control of such child to pay to such society or corporation a certain stated sum for the maintenance of such child. When, however, a child is so placed in the custody of such society or corporation, and defendant fails to make the payments as ordered by the court, the court shall cause the arrest and arraignment before it of such defendant, and shall impose upon the defendant the penalty provided in this section.

Defense of Rutgers College Students for Criminal Arrest

2011-04-01T14:16:00.000-07:00

By Kenneth A. Vercammen, Past Chair NJ State Bar Municipal Court and DWI Section

Our office often represents college students charged with criminal and disorderly persons offenses. We provide representation throughout New Jersey. Criminal charges can cost you. If convicted of possession of drugs or a crime, you can face jail, high fines, Probation over 18 months and other penalties. Dont give up! Our Law Office can provide experienced attorney representation for marijuana, underage drinking and other criminal matters. Our website kennethvercammen.com provides information on criminal offenses we can be retained to represent people.

Consequences of a Criminal Guilty Plea in Superior Court

1 If you plead guilty you will have a criminal record

2. Before the judge can accept your guilty plea, you will have to stand up in open court and tell the judge what you did that makes you guilty of the particular offense in front of all persons in the courtroom.

3. You can go to jail, pay thousands of dollars in fines, and may be barred from future employment

3. You may not be able to get a job as a teacher, public employee, banking industry, real estate or other state regulated field.

4. On employment applications, you will have to answer yes that you were convicted of a crime.

5. You must pay a $75 Safe Neighborhood Services Fund assessment for each conviction. You must pay a minimum Violent Crimes Compensation Board assessment of $50 ($100 minimum if you are convicted of a crime of violence) for each count to which you plead guilty.

6. If you are being sentenced to probation, you must pay a fee of up to $25 per month for the term of probation.

7 In all drug cases, the statute requires mandatory driver’s license suspension. New Jersey does not have a special license to go to work or school.

8. In indictable matters, you will be required to provide a DNA sample, which could be used by law enforcement for the investigation of criminal activity, and pay for the cost of testing.

9. You must pay restitution if the court finds there is a victim who has suffered a loss.

10. If you are a public office holder or employee, you can be required to forfeit your office or job by virtue of your plea of guilty.

11. If you are not a United States citizen or national, you may be deported by virtue of your plea of guilty.

12. You must wait 5-10 years to expunge a first offense. 2C:52-3

13. You lose the presumption against incarceration in future cases. 2C:44-1

14. You may lose your right to vote.

The defense of a person charged with possession of marijuana or other criminal offense is not impossible. There are a number of viable defenses and arguments which can be pursued to achieve a successful result. Advocacy, commitment, and persistence are essential to defending a client accused of involvement with marijuana, hashish or other illegal cannabis derivatives. The Superior Court handles possession of larger amounts of marijuana, or other illegal drugs and possession with intent to distribute drugs

Corporal punishment considered to be child abuse DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, DIVISION OF YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES v C.H.,

2011-01-23T11:36:00.000-08:00

Corporal punishment considered to be child abuse

DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND

FAMILIES, DIVISION OF YOUTH

AND FAMILY SERVICES v C.H.,

Decided

Before Judges Axelrad, Sapp-Peterson and Espinosa.

On appeal from a Final Decision of the Department of Children and Families, Division of Youth and Family Services, Docket No. AHU 07-551.

Marianne Rebel Brown, attorney for appellant.

Paula T. Dow, Attorney General, attorney for respondent (Melissa H. Raksa, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; Clinton Page, Deputy Attorney General, on the brief).

The opinion of the court was delivered by

SAPP-PETERSON, J.A.D.

Appellant C.H. appeals from a final administrative agency decision by the Director of the New Jersey Division of Youth and Family Services (Division) finding that on November 20, 2003, appellant had committed an act of child abuse as defined by N.J.S.A. 9:6-8.21(c)(4)(b) by failing to exercise a minimum degree of care by unreasonably inflicting excessive corporal punishment upon her daughter, T.H. We affirm.

The incident that triggered the Division's finding against C.H. resulted from a referral it received on November 21, 2003, from T.H.'s school nurse, who reported that T.H.'s teacher brought T.H. to her office where she observed red demarcations on the right side of T.H.'s face, three to four inches long, and also observed dark red scratches, two inches in length, on T.H.'s right elbow and left cheek, as well as a greenish demarcation on the middle of her back. The Division dispatched two workers to the school where they interviewed T.H., who stated that her mother had beaten her with a paddle the previous evening after learning that she had told a neighbor that they were without electricity in the home. The school nurse did not believe that T.H. required medical attention. The workers took pictures of the bruises they observed and returned to their office where they discussed the matter with their supervisor. It was agreed at that time that there was no need to involve the police or the prosecutor.

Later that day, the workers appeared at C.H.'s home and advised her of why they were there. C.H. explained that the electricity had gone out on November 19, due to a storm and was restored on November 20. She confirmed that T.H. had gone across the street to a neighbor's house and told the neighbor that there was no electricity in their home. She admitted to spanking T.H. but only on her buttocks while T.H. was still clothed. She told the workers that T.H. had no marks on her when she left for school earlier that day and offered a number of possibilities for the marks, including the sensitive nature of T.H.'s skin that may have developed into a rash from lotion, playing with the cat around her neck, as T.H. was known to do, or doing somersaults. C.H. also suggested the injuries may have been sustained at school.

Two weeks later, at the request of the Division, Dr. Patty Vitale conducted a physical examination of T.H., who was accompanied to the examination by C.H. Dr. Vitale authored a report that was admitted into evidence at the hearing without objection. In the report, Dr. Vitale noted that she found T.H. to be a "well-developed" and "well-nourished female." She was unable to confirm the injuries to the face and elbow because the injuries had since "desorbed without any residual." Although she observed some old scarring on the body, there was no indication of the source of those scars.

Dr. Vitale's report also discussed her conversation with C.H. during which C.H. told her that T.H.'s story was not true and that T.H., like all children, sometimes did not tell the truth. C.H. also explained to Dr. Vitale that she used other forms of discipline upon T.H., but spanked her when "more significant discipline [was] required." She also shared with Dr. Vitale her experience with undisciplined children in her professional capacity and that she intended to use discipline in an effort to prevent her daughter from "end[ing] up on the streets or doing drugs[.]"

Dr. Vitale, in addition to performing a physical examination of T.H., also interviewed her. T.H. told Dr. Vitale that "mom started beating me" using a paddle "[o]n my eye like two times and on my back, that's it[,]" and that her mom hit her with the paddle on her "[f]ace, eyes, [and] cheek." T.H. told Dr. Vitale that this was the only time that C.H. had ever hit her in this way. However, when Dr. Vitale asked her if her mother had ever hit her in the face, she said "No" and reported that her cheek had been red because she scraped herself at home. Further, when asked whether her mom hit her on the face or whether she fell, she said, "I fell."

Dr. Vitale concluded that C.H.'s discipline was inappropriate and that she had used excessive force when disciplining T.H. Dr. Vitale also expressed her concern that C.H. believed that the discipline she administered to T.H. was appropriate. She believed that C.H. would benefit from parenting education and recommended that the Division "assess whether mom could benefit from additional support services."

In a letter dated February 23, 2004, the Division notified C.H. that it had affirmed the finding made by its district office that child abuse was substantiated as to T.H. C.H. appealed this decision and the matter was assigned to an administrative law judge (ALJ) as a contested case and a hearing was conducted. See N.J.S.A. 52:14F-1 to -23.

Following the presentation of the evidence, the ALJ found the evidence was insufficient to sustain the allegation that C.H. committed an act of physical child abuse under N.J.S.A. 9:6-8.21(c) and that the Division "did not have 'good cause' to make a finding of substantiated child abuse."

Specifically, the ALJ concluded:

There is no evidence in the record to establish that the injuries suffered by T.H. were either life-threatening or so serious as to cause any disfigurement or loss or impairment of the function of any bodily organ. There is no indication that either the school nurse or the DYFS investigator believed these injuries were sufficiently serious so as to require medical attention. I FIND that these are not serious injuries that are likely to cause death or serious or protracted disfigurement or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily organ. I also FIND that there is no evidence in the record that the child's physical, mental or emotional condition has been impaired or is in imminent danger of becoming impaired. Obviously, if there had been a series of these incidents involving respondent, my findings could differ greatly, since multiple incidents might create or allow to be created a substantial or ongoing risk of physical injury to such child.

I am convinced that C.H. is a good parent who believed she was acting in her daughter's best interest. I FIND that what occurred was an isolated incident and did not involve the infliction of excessive corporal punishment resulting in serious injuries or impairment.

The ALJ recommended the reversal of the Division's findings and that C.H.'s name should not be placed on the Central Registry of substantiated child abusers.

The Director issued a final agency decision rejecting the recommendation of the ALJ. The Director found striking T.H. "repeatedly with a paddle, multiple times and with sufficient force to cause marks could certainly qualify as abuse per N.J.S.A. 9:6-8.21(c)(4)(b)[.]" Additionally, the Director expressed the view that when consideration is given to the reason why C.H. admittedly struck her daughter, because she told the neighbor there was no electricity in their home, C.H.'s actions went "beyond any semblance of reason, and provide[d] no justification for C.H.'s decision to administer any measure of corporal punishment" to a five-year old child.

The Director also considered that there had been "a history of questionable administration of corporal punishment." She noted that C.H. testified that she had physically paddled T.H. two months earlier and told Division investigators that she physically disciplined T.H. one to two times per month. Further, during a prior Division investigation conducted in 2001, when T.H. was only three years old, C.H. admitted that she routinely disciplined T.H. by pinching the child's inner thighs. The Director concluded that the "pattern of corporal punishment on such a young child is troubling and, when considered in concert with [the] instant matter, there is ample support to uphold this substantiation." The ensuing appeal followed.

On appeal C.H. contends:

POINT I

THE FINDING BY [THE] ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE . . . THAT C.H. DID NOT ABUSE OR NEGLECT HER DAUGHTER WAS NOT REJECTED BY [THE] DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, DIVISION OF YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES, ON A TIMELY BASIS. [THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE]'S FINDING SHOULD BE ADOPTED.

POINT II

THE DEPARTMENT OF FAMILIES, DIVISION OF YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES DID NOT MEET THE STANDARD REQUIRED TO MODIFY OR REJECT THE FINDING OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE.

POINT III

THE RECORD DOES NOT SUBSTANTIATE A FINDING OF CHILD ABUSE. THE FINAL DECISION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, DIVISION[] OF YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES MUST BE REVERSED.

We first dispense, as meritless, appellant's contention that the Director failed to reject the ALJ's recommended decision in a timely fashion. The Division obtained two orders extending the time in which to issue its final agency decision. See N.J.A.C. 1:1-18.8 (permitting extensions of time limits in which to file a final decision). The final decision was issued prior to the expiration of the second extension.

Turning to the remaining arguments, we begin by noting that in challenging an agency's determination, an appellant carries a substantial burden of persuasion, and the agency's determination carries a presumption of reasonableness. Gloucester County Welfare Bd. v. State Civil Serv. Comm'n, 93 N.J. 384, 390-91 (1983). Consequently, the scope of our review of the issue before us remains limited. "Reviewing courts should give considerable weight to any agency's interpretation of a statute the agency is charged with enforcing." G.S. v.Dep't of Human Servs., 157 N.J. 161, 170 (1999). "Absent arbitrary, unreasonable or capricious action, the agency's determination must be affirmed." Ibid. (citing R & R Mktg., L.L.C. v. Brown-Forman Corp., 158 N.J. 170, 175 (1999)). "Although we recognize that deference is generally given to an administrative agency charged with interpretation of the law, we are not bound by the agency's legal opinions." Levine v. State Dep't of Transp., 338 N.J. Super. 28, 32 (App. Div. 2001) (citing G.S. v. Dep't of Human Servs., supra, 157 N.J. at 170). Additionally, where an agency head rejects a recommendation of an ALJ, the basis for rejecting the recommendation must be set forth by the agency head with particularity and new or modified findings supported by sufficient, competent, and credible evidence in the record must be made. N.J.S.A. 52:14B-10(c).

Here, in rejecting the ALJ's recommendation, the Director found the ALJ's conclusion that "there is no evidence in the record that the child's physical, mental or emotional condition has been impaired or is in imminent danger of becoming impaired" was "inconsistent with the evidence in the record." We agree.

N.J.S.A. 9:6-8.21(c)(4)(b) defines an abused or neglected child as:

a child whose physical, mental, or emotional condition has been impaired or is in imminent danger of becoming impaired as the result of the failure of his parent or guardian, as herein defined, to exercise a minimum degree of care . . . (b) in providing the child with proper supervision or guardianship, by unreasonably inflicting or allowing to be inflicted harm, or substantial risk thereof, including the infliction of excessive corporal punishment; or by any other acts of a similarly serious nature requiring the aid of the court[.]

[N.J.S.A. 9:6-8.21(c) (emphasis added).]

We have held that the phrase "minimum degree of care" refers to conduct that is "grossly or wantonly negligent, but not necessarily intentional." G.S. v Dep't of Human Servs., supra, 157 N.J. at 178. Child abuse ranges from situations of "slight inadvertence to malicious purpose to inflict injury." Ibid. As the Director stated, there is absolutely nothing reasonable about inflicting harm, in the form of paddling, upon a five-year-old child because the child told a neighbor that their home was without electricity, a situation which the Director appropriately characterized as "innocuous." Moreover, evidence that T.H.'s "physical, mental or emotional condition . . . is in imminent danger of becoming impaired as the result of the failure of [C.H.] to exercise a minimum degree of care" because of the unreasonable infliction of corporal punishment was established by C.H.'s admitted use of corporal punishment regularly, including the pinching of T.H. when she was three years old as a form of punishment and her belief that no one could tell her how to discipline her own child. As we have previously recognized, "[i]n child abuse and neglect cases the elements of proof are synergistically related. Each proven act of neglect has some effect on the [child]. One act may be 'substantial' or the sum of many acts may be 'substantial.'" N.J. Div. of Youth and Family Servs. v. C.M., 181 N.J. Super. 190, 201 (App. Div. 1981). See also Div. of Youth & Family Servs. v. Robert M., 347 N.J. Super. 44, 68 (App. Div.), certif. denied, 174 N.J. 39 (2002).

In Robert M., the Division appealed the dismissal of its complaint for continuing custody of the four biological children of the defendants. Id. at 47. In addition to their own biological children, the defendants adopted three children from Russia, one of whom died less than one year later. Id. at 47-50. His death was ruled a homicide and the defendants were arrested and initially charged with child endangerment but were later indicted and charged with, among other offenses, aggravated manslaughter. Id. at 52. They entered pleas of not guilty and were awaiting trial at the time the trial court conducted its fact-finding hearing on the abuse and neglect charges. Id. at 57. At the hearing, the court excluded interviews that had been taken of the four older children in connection with a risk assessment the Division had requested because of discovery violations. Id. at 58. During these interviews, the children described the discipline to which the decedent had been exposed. Id. at 53-55. We granted leave to the Division to appeal the dismissal of its complaint and concluded the trial court committed reversible error when it excluded "relevant proof of parental abuse which could be considered on the question of past or potential abuse of the other children." Id. at 67. We observed that:

[a]lthough the absence of past physical abuse to the natural children may infer their future safety, the alleged treatment of [the decedent] could be a dangerous harbinger to one or more of the others. As we stated in J.& E. v. M.& F., 157 N.J. Super. 478, 493 (App. Div.), certif. denied, 77 N.J. 490 (1978)[:]

Predictions as to probable future conduct can only be based upon past performance . . . . We cannot conceive that the Legislature intended to guarantee parents at least one chance to kill or abuse each child. Evidence of parents' fitness or unfitness can be gleaned not only [from] their past treatment of the child in question but also from the quality of care given to other children in their custody.

[Id. at 68 (emphasis added).]

"[A]s a part of its burden of proof, [in abuse and neglect cases] the State must still demonstrate by a preponderance of the competent, material and relevant evidence . . . the probability of present or future harm." N.J. Div. of Youth & Family Servs. v. S.S., 372 N.J. Super. 13, 24 (App. Div. 2004), certif. denied, 182 N.J. 426 (2005). The evidence presented regarding the Division's prior experience with C.H. was relevant to meeting this burden. The ALJ permitted the Division to introduce evidence of its prior experience with C.H. in connection with an earlier referral as relevant to the issue of C.H.'s knowledge that the manner in which she was disciplining T.H. was of concern to the Division. Contrary to C.H.'s argument on appeal, this evidence was also relevant to the likelihood that she would continue to expose T.H. to the unjustifiable discipline to which she exposed T.H. on November 20, 2003.

We are persuaded that there was more than sufficient evidence in the record demonstrating that the ALJ's ultimate findings that the incident of November 20, 2003 was isolated and that abuse had not been substantiated were not supported by the record. The Director properly considered the entire record presented to the ALJ before rejecting the recommendation and clearly articulated her reasons for doing so. N.J.S.A. 52:14B-10(c).

Affirmed.

VOLUNTEER LEGAL INTERNS NEEDED- PUBLIC DEFENDER OF METUCHEN

2010-12-27T14:26:00.001-08:00

VOLUNTEER LEGAL INTERNS NEEDED- PUBLIC DEFENDER OF METUCHEN

The Public Defenders provide Indigent individuals charged with criminal or serious motor vehicle charges with free or limited cost legal defense. The Public Defender of Metuchen welcomes persons to serve as volunteer interns. Volunteer Law Clerk interns will attend Wednesday evening and every other Friday morning court sessions.

Volunteer to help indigent people charged with criminal and motor vehicle offenses of magnitude. In additional to time in court, you will be given projects to provide information to the public on updated criminal laws and statutes. Help people less fortunate than you who are down on their luck. This is an unpaid internship helping indigent persons.

Court times: WEDNESDAY 1pm PM [approx]- 8:30 PM, every other Friday 9-12, plus hearing preparation work.

Volunteer Internship Description:

-Interview Clients facing charges in Municipal Court including Drug Possession, Drunk Driving, Assault, Driving While Suspended and other criminal and traffic offenses

-Make demands for Discovery on Prosecutor and review police reports

-Attend hearings and learn from experienced trial attorneys

-Prepare Motions to Suppress Evidence and Motions to Compel Discovery

-Conduct appropriate Legal research

-Acquire skills in Criminal Law and Procedure by active participation

-Participate in Public Relations activities and help organize seminars

- Update Lists of Prosecutors, Judges and Attorneys for publication of

NJ Municipal Court Law Review

- Revise criminal and traffic law Articles and submit to Law Journals and criminal law websites.

- Learn how to add criminal statutes and criminal articles to legal blogs and websites. http://criminal-jury.blogspot.com/

Program lasts 12 weeks. Minimum time commitment September- May is 10 hours per week. Must be over 18 years old and have a car. You can work more hours if you want and more than 12 weeks.

For Summer- College graduates and Law students only. Minimum Volunteer time commitment in summer- 18 hours per week. Send cover letter and resume. After sending resume, call to schedule interview

We are committed to excellence and service to clients and the community. Applicants must have attention to detail. We attempt to give assignments which will be meaningful and memorable but, nevertheless, expect that the volunteers will pitch in on whatever needs to be done.

Interested persons must mail or fax a cover letter indicating the internship they are applying for and resume. If no personal cover letter by student, the resume will not be considered.

PUBLIC DEFENDER OF METUCHEN

Att: Kenneth Vercammen, Esq.

2053 Woodbridge Ave.

Edison, NJ 08817

(Phone) 732-572-0500

(Fax) 732-572-0030

State in the Interest of A.S. (A-58/59-09)

2010-07-31T04:47:00.001-07:00

State in the Interest of A.S. (A-58/59-09)
Argued April 27, 2010 -- Decided July 29, 2010
LaVECCHIA, J., writing for a unanimous Court.
The issue in this appeal is whether, under the totality of the circumstances, A.S., a juvenile, knowingly,
voluntarily, and intelligently confessed to conduct that, if committed by an adult, would constitute first-degree
aggravated sexual assault.
A.S. was the adoptive daughter of F.D. A.S. and F.D. lived in one-half of a duplex; the other half was
inhabited by F.D.’s daughter T.B., and T.B.’s four-year-old son C.J., who was F.D.’s grandson. While A.S. was
home with C.J. on the night of November 25, 2007, she allegedly performed fellatio on the boy for a period of
approximately ten minutes. Although A.S. told C.J. not to tell anyone about the incident, after his bath the next
night around midnight, C.J. told his mother what A.S. had done. T.B. had F.D. come over and T.B. repeated what
she heard had happened the previous day. F.D. confronted A.S. Later that night, T.B. contacted the police and at
some point during the following day, while still at home, A.S. apparently confessed to the act in the presence of T.B.
and F.D., stating that she did not know why she did it.
C.J. and A.S. were interviewed by detectives at the Somerset County Prosecutor’s Office. A detective
interviewed A.S., with F.D. present. Although the interview was videotaped, a transcript or verbatim record of the
tape was not admitted into evidence at trial; however, the actual VHS cassettes, though of poor quality, were
introduced into evidence. At the outset of the interview the detective requested that F.D. read to A.S. her Miranda
rights, which she did in less than one minute without any clarification. F.D. then read aloud the portion of the form
dealing with her rights as a parent and she expressed some concerns. The detective attempted to clarify F.D.’s rights
and blamed her confusion on the fact that the form was written by a lawyer. That exchange took almost three
minutes.
F.D. and A.S. engaged in a conversation in which A.S., when asked if she wanted an attorney, inquired
about an attorney’s functions. Both F.D. and the detective explained that the attorney would represent her and, as
explained by F.D., the attorney would “make sure your rights are not violated.” In addition, A.S. was told that the
attorney would not speak for her and that she had to answer questions and answer them truthfully because that
would demonstrate that she was a “good person.” Throughout, F.D. insisted that A.S. tell the detective what she did.
Eventually, more than thirty minutes into the interview, A.S. confessed that she had “sucked [C.J.’s] tinky” for ten
minutes and then went to sleep. After A.S. confessed, the interview continued for thirty more minutes. F.D.
interjected and asked A.S. questions throughout, chastising her several times. The questions addressed to A.S. were
greeted with long periods of silence on her part, some lasting over a minute, causing the detective to say “[we] can’t
do this all night.”
Defense counsel filed a motion to suppress the videotaped interview, and that motion was argued as part of
A.S.’s delinquency adjudication. Counsel contended that A.S.’s confession should be suppressed because A.S.
understood neither her right to remain silent nor her right to an attorney and that her confession was not freely and
voluntarily given. Counsel also argued that F.D. had acted as an interrogator and had unduly pressured A.S. to
confess, abdicating her responsibility as a parent to A.S. and instead advancing the interests of her grandson. A.S.
testified, acknowledging that she was not yelled at or threatened, and stating that although she was in ninth grade,
she only read at a third-grade level. A.S. testified that she really didn’t want to answer the questions posed to her,
and that was why she remained silent so often during the questioning, but that questions kept coming and that she
felt pressured.
2
The juvenile court denied the motion to suppress the videotaped interview. The court characterized, with
understatement, the procedure by which the Miranda warnings were given as “a little unusual” and “probably not the
best police practice.” Nonetheless, the court was satisfied that A.S. was read and understood her rights. The court
then found that A.S. had committed an act that, if performed by an adult, would constitute first-degree aggravated
sexual assault, contrary to N.J.S.A. 2C:14-2(a)(1), and adjudicated her delinquent. The court noted that there was
ample evidence in the record to support its finding whether or not it admitted A.S.’s videotaped statement into
evidence.
A.S. appealed and a “troubled” Appellate Division affirmed. The Appellate Division applied the totality of
the circumstances test that the Supreme Court annunciated in State v. Presha, 163 N.J. 304 (2000), and
determined that “the State has failed to meet its burden of demonstrating beyond a reasonable doubt that A.S.’s
confession was knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily given.” The Appellate Division found that A.S. did not
understand her Miranda rights and that the efforts made to help her understand those rights were not only
ineffectual, but actually misinformed her. Additionally, the Appellate Division was concerned by F.D.’s conflict of
interest because of her relationship to both A.S. and the victim, her grandson C.J., characterizing F.D.’s role not as a
parent, but rather as an “interrogator.” In order to avoid such problems in future cases in which the parental figure
has a close relationship with both the victim and the accused, the Appellate Division posited that “the prudent
approach would be to require the presence of an attorney capable of advising the juvenile with respect to her rights
and her potential culpability, a procedure adopted elsewhere.” Despite those concerns, the Appellate Division
affirmed A.S.’s delinquency adjudication based on the other evidence in the record in light of the trial court’s
statement that A.S.’s confession was not absolutely necessary to its ruling.
Both parties appealed and the Supreme Court granted the State’s petition for certification and A.S.’s crosspetition
for certification. The Court also granted the Attorney General of New Jersey and the Office of the Child
Advocate of New Jersey status to appear as amici curiae.
HELD: Upon consideration of the totality of the circumstances, A.S.’s confession was not knowingly, intelligently,
and voluntarily given. In addition, the confession by far was the most damning piece of evidence against A.S. and
thus the Court cannot say that there was no reasonable possibility that its introduction into evidence contributed to
the delinquency adjudication, and so, in the particular circumstances presented in this case, the Court is constrained
to reverse A.S.’s conviction and remand for new proceedings.
1. The Court begins, as did the Appellate Division, with the decision in Presha, its seminal case addressing the
admissibility of juvenile confessions. In order for a juvenile’s confession to be admissible into evidence it must
satisfy the same standard that applies to adult confessions: that is, it must be made knowingly, intelligently, and
voluntarily. The Court looks to the totality of the circumstances in making that determination. In Presha, the Court
also noted the increased emphasis being placed on punishment as a rationale underlying the juvenile justice system,
as opposed to its traditional rehabilitative purposes. In light of that paradigm shift, the Court instructed courts to
consider the parent’s role as a “highly significant factor” in the totality of the circumstances analysis used to assess
whether a juvenile’s confession was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary. However, the mere presence of a parent is
insufficient to protect a juvenile’s rights, because presence alone cannot be said to provide the buffer between police
and the juvenile that the Court was contemplating in its decision in Presha. In order to serve as a buffer, the parent
must be acting with the interests of the juvenile in mind. (Pp. 19-22)
2. The factors relevant when making the totality of the circumstances determination include the child’s age,
education and intelligence, advice as to constitutional rights, length of detention, whether the questioning was
repeated and prolonged in nature and whether physical punishment or mental exhaustion was involved, prior
experience with the legal system, and the “highly significant factor” of parental involvement. A.S. was fourteen
years old at the time of the interrogation. That age put her on the cusp for heightened protections because a
fourteen-year-old is still of tender sensibilities and may have great difficulty withstanding the rigors of a police
interrogation. Furthermore, although A.S. was in ninth grade at school, she was not intellectually sophisticated. She
read at a third-grade level and had a “low-average” I.Q. of 83. In addition, she had no prior experience with the
legal system. In light of those facts, the actual efforts employed to inform A.S. of her constitutional rights were
woefully inadequate. Indeed, the detective abdicated his responsibility in that regard by having F.D. read A.S. her
rights, a procedure which tainted the interview from its outset and must not be utilized in the future. In addition,
telling a juvenile who does not understand her rights that an attorney would “make sure your rights aren’t violated”
3
is an empty gesture. Moreover, the attempts to inform A.S. of her rights contained actual misinformation. An
impartial review of the videotaped interview yields convincing evidence that the “greatest care” was not taken to
protect A.S.’s constitutional rights in this case. The Court therefore concludes, upon consideration of the totality of
the circumstances, that A.S.’s confession was not knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily given. (Pp. 22-28)
3. The Court must determine whether the admission of A.S.’s confession into evidence was harmful: that is,
whether it was “clearly capable of producing an unjust result.” R. 2:10-2. The Appellate Division, although
“troubled,” affirmed A.S.’s delinquency adjudication in large part due to the juvenile court’s assessment that even if
the videotaped statement had not been introduced into evidence, the court still would have adjudicated A.S.
delinquent. The confession by far was the most damning piece of evidence against A.S. and thus the Court cannot
say that there was no reasonable possibility that its introduction into evidence contributed to the delinquency
adjudication, and so, in the particular circumstances presented in this case, the Court is constrained to reverse A.S.’s
conviction and remand for new proceedings. (Pp. 28-30)
4. Because the Court finds that A.S.’s confession was not voluntarily given under the totality of the circumstances
test as described in Presha, its decision does not hinge on whether F.D. had a conflict of interest that rendered her
unable to fulfill the parental role contemplated by Presha. The Court, however, declines to embrace a categorical
rule that an attorney must be present any time that there is perceived clash in the interests of a parent based on a
familial relationship with the victim or another involved in the investigation. Even in cases of such apparent
clashing interests, a parent may be able to fulfill the role envisioned in Presha. And in those cases where a parent is
truly conflicted, another adult – not necessarily an attorney – may be able to fulfill the parental assistance role
envisioned by Presha. (Pp. 30-33)
The judgment of the Appellate Division is REVERSED and the matter is REMANDED for new
proceedings consistent with this opinion.
CHIEF JUSTICE RABNER and JUSTICES LONG, ALBIN, WALLACE, RIVERA-SOTO, and
HOENS join in JUSTICE LaVECCHIA’s opinion.

EVIDENCE - CRIMINAL LAW- STATE OF NJ IN THE INTEREST OF D.H. ( A-1654-08T4)

2010-06-11T07:50:00.001-07:00

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-1654-08T41654-08T4

STATE OF NEW JERSEY IN THE INTEREST OF D.H.

_______________________

Submitted January 5, 2010 - Decided

Before Judges Wefing and LeWinn.

On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey,

Chancery Division, Gloucester County,

Nos. FJ-08-858-08, FJ-08-927-08, FJ-08-1331-08.

Yvonne Smith Segars, Public Defender, attorney

for appellant D.H. (Gilbert G. Miller, Designated

Counsel, of counsel and on the brief).

Sean F. Dalton, Gloucester County Prosecutor,

attorney for respondent State of New Jersey

(Joseph H. Enos, Jr., Assistant Prosecutor,

on the brief).

PER CURIAM

D.H., a juvenile, was charged with acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute burglary and theft. Following trial, he was found not guilty of burglary but guilty of theft. He appeals. After reviewing the record in light of the contentions advanced on appeal, we reverse.

On the morning of July 23, 2007, John Rooney walked to his car, parked in front of his residence, intending to drive to work. He found that the car doors had been opened and the interior ransacked. In the trunk was a box in which he had stored a GPS navigation system he had only recently obtained; the box was empty. Mr. Rooney summoned the police and the officer who responded to the scene carefully removed the box from the trunk and later delivered it to an investigator in his department. The investigator dusted the box and found several latent fingerprints. He did not attempt to lift the prints himself but forwarded the box to the county prosecutor's office to complete the process.

Detective Nicholas Kappre of the prosecutor's Crime Scene Unit took the box and lifted eight partial latent prints which he forwarded to the New Jersey State Police AFIS (Automated Fingerprint Identification System) unit. Of those eight, only two were found to be suitable for purposes of comparison. Detective Kappre received back a card containing ten prints that had been selected by AFIS, together with a computer print-out containing an enlargement of the latent print and the known print. Detective Kappre compared the latent print with the known print he had received from AFIS and testified that they were a match.

Detective Kappre also received from AFIS a list of twenty-five potential matches, identified by SBI number. Detective Kappre did not investigate any of those other potential matches to perform a comparison. There was testimony from which it could be inferred that D.H. headed this list, with the word "hit" next to his identification. There was no testimony to explain the significance of the term "hit" and no testimony linking D.H. to that SBI number. Nor did Detective Kappre take defendant's fingerprints to compare them either to the latent prints retrieved from the box or the ten-print card or enlargements he had received from AFIS.

Although Detective Kappre had received some training in fingerprint identification, he had never testified before on the question of fingerprint comparison. There was no attempt to qualify Detective Kappre to testify as an expert with respect to the workings of AFIS.

The trial was unfortunately protracted and heard in segments over eight days from May through September, 2008. Detective Kappre was the last witness for the prosecution. At the conclusion of his testimony on July 10, 2008, the prosecutor stated that the State was resting its case, and she then began to move documents into evidence, including the AFIS print screens Kappre had received from the State Police. Defense counsel objected, asserting they were hearsay, and that no foundation had been laid for their admission.

The trial court permitted the prosecution to recall Detective Kappre to the stand. For unavoidable reasons, the trial did not resume until August 7. Over defendant's objection, Detective Kappre took the stand. He testified that he had received from AFIS the latent prints he had taken from the box, the print screen AFIS had prepared comparing the latent prints and the known prints stored in the AFIS system and the ten-print card. Defendant objected to Kappre's testimony that the ten-print card contained D.H.'s name; he also testified that he believed the latent prints on the GPS box belonged to D.H.

On appeal, D.H. raises the following contentions for our consideration:

POINT I THE TRIAL COURT PERMITTED INADMISSIBLE HEARSAY THAT THE FINGERPRINTS FEATURED ON THE 10-PRINT CARDS SUPPLIED TO INVESTIGATOR KAPPRE BY AFIS AND THE WEST DEPTFORD POLICE, AND ON EXHIBITS D-7 AND D-8 WERE THE JUVENILE'S

POINT II THE COURT'S DECISION TO PERMIT THE STATE TO REOPEN ITS CASE VIOLATED THE JUVENILE'S RIGHT AGAINST DOUBLE JEOPARDY

POINT III THE JUVENILE WAS ENTITLED TO A JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL ON EACH OF THE COUNTS

POINT IV THE TRIAL COURT'S SENTENCING DISPOSITION WAS EXCESSIVE AND CONTRARY TO THE REHABILITATIVE FOCUS OF THE NEW JERSEY CODE OF JUVENILE JUSTICE

Hearsay is a "statement, other than one by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." N.J.R.E. 801(c). Admissibility of hearsay evidence is governed both by the hearsay exceptions set forth in N.J.R.E. 803 and 804, in criminal matters, by analysis of whether the proffered evidence is "testimonial" in nature under Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36,124 S. Ct. 1354, 158 L. Ed.2d 177 (2004).

The trial court ruled that the print screens Detective Kappre received from AFIS were admissible under the business records exception to the hearsay rule.

Under N.J.R.E. 803(c)(6), Records of Regularly Conducted Activity, business records are an exception to the hearsay rule:

A statement contained in a writing or other record of acts, events, conditions, and, subject to Rule 808, opinions or diagnoses, made at or near the time of observation by a person with actual knowledge or from information supplied by such a person, if the writing or other record was made in the regular course of business and it was the regular practice of that business to make it, unless the sources of information or the method, purpose, or circumstances of preparation indicate that it is not trustworthy.

New Jersey does not require that the custodian of the records testify as a condition to their admission. Supreme Court Committee Comment toN.J.R.E. 803(c)(6) (1991). However, a foundation must be laid establishing that the documents are admissible. Ibid.

Under the old rule, "the custodian or other qualified witness" had to testify as to the identity and mode of preparation of the business record. Biunno, Current N.J. Rules of Evidence, comment 1 on N.J.R.E. 803(c)(6) (2009) (quoting N.J.S.A. 2A:82-35). The new rule is "substantially similar." Ibid. The primary difference is requiring the document be made in regular business practice. Ibid. (cited with approval in State v.Sweet, 195 N.J. 357, 370 n.8 (2008), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 129 S. Ct. 2858, 174 L. Ed.2d 601 (2009)).

The New Jersey Supreme Court in State v. Matulewicz, 101 N.J. 27, 29 (1985), found that in order for evidence to be admitted under the business records exception: "First, the writing must be made in the regular course of business. Second, it must be prepared within a short time of the act, condition or event being described. Finally, the source of the information and the method and circumstances of the preparation of the writing must justify allowing it into evidence." (finding State Police chemist's laboratory report inadmissible as a business record because the factual record below was "devoid of evidence that would elucidate the 'method and circumstances' involved in the preparation of the . . . report"). Although Matulewicz was decided under the old statute, it has been held as the standard by the New Jersey Supreme Court after the current rule for business records was adopted in 1991. See, e.g., Sweet, supra, 195 N.J. at 370; Feldman v. Lederle Labs. (Feldman III), 132 N.J. 339, 354 (1993).

No foundation was ever laid for entry of the AFIS documents. The writing must be made in the regular course of business and made by someone with actual knowledge, or someone who with actual knowledge supplied the information. N.J.R.E. 803(c)(6). While the person with "actual knowledge" need not be the person who lays the foundation for entry of the business record, Hahnemann University Hospital v. Dudnick, 292 N.J. Super. 11, 17-18 (App. Div. 1996), the foundation must be laid by someone with personal knowledge that the records were kept in the ordinary course of business and the circumstances in which the records were made. N.J.R.E. 803(c)(6); N.J.R.E. 602 (a witness can only testify to matters he or she has personal knowledge of).

Detective Kappre did not have the requisite knowledge to lay the foundation for the admission of these AFIS records as business records. He had only the barest knowledge of AFIS and could testify only that it used an algorithm to generate a response to a request. The trial court, in a proper exercise of its discretion, admitted Kappre as an expert in fingerprint comparison, and thus he properly expressed the opinion that the latent prints removed from the GPS box matched the prints on the screen he received from AFIS. He had no basis, however, upon which to testify that the enlarged prints he received from AFIS to compare with the latent prints were, in fact, the prints of D.H.

In addition to the enlargements, Detective Kappre also received two 10-print cards, one from AFIS, and one from the municipal police which, testimony indicates, bore D.H.'s name. Those cards were never received in evidence, however. And, even if they had been proffered, they would suffer from the same evidential deficiency as the enlargements; Detective Kappre lacked the knowledge to testify that the cards in fact contained D.H.'s prints for he had no knowledge of their preparation or recordation.

In addition to citing the business records exception to the hearsay rule, the trial court ruled that these documents received from AFIS were admissible as public records under N.J.R.E. 1005. This rule provides, "The contents of an official record or of a writing authorized to be recorded or filed, if otherwise admissible, may be proved by a copy, certified as correct in accordance with Rule 902, or testified to be correct by a witness who has compared it with the original." N.J.R.E. 1005 specifies, however, that the document must be "otherwise admissible." Here, the AFIS records were not "otherwise admissible" in the absence of a proper foundation, which Kappre was not equipped to provide.

We also note, although defendant does not explicitly raise it in his brief, that Kappre testified that the prints received from AFIS were computer-generated and that the process of taking fingerprints by computer, as opposed to by a manual ink roll, involves certain distortions. Kappre was not asked to explain the significance of these distortions and their effect, if any, on his comparison of these prints. We recently addressed an analogous situation in Rodd v. Raritan Radiologic Associates, P.A., 373 N.J. Super. 154 (App. Div. 2004), in which we held inadmissible, in the absence of foundational testimony, a computer-generated blow-up of a mammogram. We noted that the radiologist, who testified about this blow-up, "offered no account of how the films were scanned into the computer, or how the computer program operated. Consequently, he added very little to explain the circumstances surrounding the computer images' creation. . . ." Id. at 169. Here, there was no testimony as to the creation of AFIS's records.

Because we are satisfied that these records were improperly admitted into evidence, and they are the only link between D.H. and the theft, his adjudication must be reversed. This makes it unnecessary to address his remaining contentions.

The order adjudicating D.H. a delinquent is reversed.

We note for the sake of completeness that we are not called upon to consider whether the trial court's determinations should be upheld under the principles of "invited error" recently articulated by the Supreme Court in Division of Youth & Family Services v. M.C. III, __ N.J. __ (2010) (slip op. at 23-25); here defense counsel objected to the admission of these documents.

EVIDENCE - CRIMINAL LAW- STATE OF NJ IN THE INTEREST OF D.H. ( A-1654-08T4)

2010-06-11T07:50:00.000-07:00

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-1654-08T41654-08T4

STATE OF NEW JERSEY IN THE INTEREST OF D.H.

_______________________

Submitted January 5, 2010 - Decided

Before Judges Wefing and LeWinn.

On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey,

Chancery Division, Gloucester County,

Nos. FJ-08-858-08, FJ-08-927-08, FJ-08-1331-08.

Yvonne Smith Segars, Public Defender, attorney

for appellant D.H. (Gilbert G. Miller, Designated

Counsel, of counsel and on the brief).

Sean F. Dalton, Gloucester County Prosecutor,

attorney for respondent State of New Jersey

(Joseph H. Enos, Jr., Assistant Prosecutor,

on the brief).

PER CURIAM

On appeal, D.H. raises the following contentions for our consideration:

POINT II THE COURT'S DECISION TO PERMIT THE STATE TO REOPEN ITS CASE VIOLATED THE JUVENILE'S RIGHT AGAINST DOUBLE JEOPARDY

POINT III THE JUVENILE WAS ENTITLED TO A JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL ON EACH OF THE COUNTS

POINT IV THE TRIAL COURT'S SENTENCING DISPOSITION WAS EXCESSIVE AND CONTRARY TO THE REHABILITATIVE FOCUS OF THE NEW JERSEY CODE OF JUVENILE JUSTICE

The trial court ruled that the print screens Detective Kappre received from AFIS were admissible under the business records exception to the hearsay rule.

Under N.J.R.E. 803(c)(6), Records of Regularly Conducted Activity, business records are an exception to the hearsay rule:

The order adjudicating D.H. a delinquent is reversed.

(continued)

A-1654-08T4

RECORD IMPOUNDED

RECENT CHANGES IN MUNICIPAL COURT LAW: 2010 – Law Center- Seminar, Books and Audio CD for sale

2010-04-26T13:03:00.001-07:00

RECENT CHANGES IN MUNICIPAL COURT LAW: 2010 – Law Center- Seminar, Books and Audio CD for sale

Monday, May 03, 2010
5:30 PM to 9:00 PM
New Jersey Law Center, New Brunswick / S1507-15379

KENNETH A. VERCAMMEN, ESQ.
Past Chair, NJSBA Municipal Court Section
Chair, ABA Elder Law Committee
Past GP Solo Section Attorney of the Year
2006 NJSBA Municipal Court Practitioner of the Year
K. Vercammen & Associates

Speakers include:
HON. JOAN ROBINSON GROSS, PJMC
(Union County)
Chair, Supreme Court Municipal Practice Committee (Union County)

WILLIAM G. BRIGIANI, ESQ.

NORMA M. MURGADO, ESQ.
Chief Prosecutor (Elizabeth)
Assistant Prosecutor (Woodbridge)

JOHN MENZEL, ESQ.
Moore & Menzel

Are you prepared to prosecute or defend your client in new Alcotest cases?

This informative guide to Municipal Court practice and procedure will familiarize you with the most recent developments affecting cases that are heard in Municipal Court.

An authoritative panel of experienced attorneys will be joined by a Presiding Municipal Court Judge to explore a wide variety of matters that you are likely to encounter. They will also bring you up to date on recent developments you need to understand in order to effectively represent your clients.

Program Preview:
• Criminal Case Law and Legislative Update
• The Prosecutor’s Perspective: DWI, no-insurance cases, recent directives from the Attorney General and Prosecutor, plea agreements in drug cases, double jeopardy issues
• Judicial Perspective: Expert arguments, important court rules, common errors by defense attorneys and prosecutors, how to impress the court and not annoy the court staff
• Recent developments in traffic law, merged traffic tickets and more
• DWI and Chun
• Ask the Experts

Tuition fees Reg. Fee Reg. Type Seminar # S1507-15378
GENERAL TUITION (REG) $169.00 REG
NJICLE SEASON TICKETS (STX) 1 Season Ticket(s) STX
MEMBERS, CO-SPONSORING SECTION (COS) $119.00 COS*
MEMBERS, NJSBA (NJB*) $129.00 NJB*
MEMBERS, NJSBA YLD (YLD*) $119.00 YLD*
Recent admittees (past 2 years) (YL) $145.00 YL
Paralegals (PAR) $119.00 PAR
Law Students (with Student ID) (STU) $0.00 STU
Full Time Judges (JUD) $0.00 JUD

Seminar number S1507-15379

DOOR REGISTRATIONS: $189
Advance registration closes at noon of the day preceding the program. After that time you may still register, space permitting, for the Door Registration Fee. PLEASE CALL FIRST to confirm the seminar schedule and space availability.
* NJSBA Member Price – To qualify for this reduced price, you must provide your NJSBA Member# at the time you place your order. If you place your order without providing your NJSBA Member#, you will be charged the regular price.

New Jersey Institute for Continuing Legal Education
The non-profit continuing education service of:
The New Jersey State Bar Association
Rutgers - The State University of New Jersey
Seton Hall University
One Constitution Square,
New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901-1520
Phone: (732)214-8500 Fax: (732)249-0383 • CustomerService@njicle.com

Presented in cooperation with the NJSBA Municipal Court Section and the NJSBA Young Lawyers’ Division

Major Municipal Court and Criminal Cases
to be discussed

1. State in the Interest of J.A. 195 NJ 324

2. State v. Buda
195 NJ 278
2b State v. Coder 198 NJ 451 (2009)

3. State v. Sweet
195 NJ 357

4 State v. Moran 408 NJ Super. 412 (App Div. 2009)

5 Herring v United States
129 S. Ct. 695 (2009)

6. State v Smith 408 NJ Super. 484 (App. Div. 2009)

7. Patel v. MVC __ NJ __
(Sup Ct. 2009)

8. State v. Marquez 408 NJ Super. 273 (App. Div. 2009)

9 Melendez-Diaz v Mass
129 S. Ct. 2527 (2009)

10 State v. Reeds
197 NJ 280 (2009)

11. State v. Hewitt
400 NJ Super. 376 (2008)

12 State v. Spell
142 NJ 514 (2008)

13. State v. Bogan
200 NJ 61 (2009)

14. State v. Baum
199 NJ 407 (2009)

15. State v. Best 403 NJ. Super. 428 (App. Div. 2008) [cert granted]

16 State v. Amelio
197 NJ 207 (2008)

17. Arizona v Johnson
172 L. Ed. 2d 694 (2009)

18 State v. Bertrand 408 NJ
Super. 584 (App. Div. 2009)

19 State v. Nyhammer
197 NJ 383 (2009)

20 State v. Filson 409 NJ
Super. 246 (Law Div. 2009)

21 State v. Popovich
405 NJ Super. 392 (App. Div. 2009)
22. State v. Pena-Flores
198 NJ 6 (2009)
23 Arizona v. Gant
129 S. Ct. 1710 (2009)

Child abuse law Definitions. 9:6-8.21

2010-02-09T19:50:00.000-08:00

Child abuse law Definitions. 9:6-8.21
1.As used in this act, unless the specific context indicates otherwise:

a."Parent or guardian" means any natural parent, adoptive parent, resource family parent, stepparent, paramour of a parent or any person, who has assumed responsibility for the care, custody or control of a child or upon whom there is a legal duty for such care. Parent or guardian includes a teacher, employee or volunteer, whether compensated or uncompensated, of an institution who is responsible for the child's welfare and any other staff person of an institution regardless of whether or not the person is responsible for the care or supervision of the child. Parent or guardian also includes a teaching staff member or other employee, whether compensated or uncompensated, of a day school as defined in section 1 of P.L.1974, c.119 (C.9:6-8.21).

b."Child" means any child alleged to have been abused or neglected.

c."Abused or neglected child" means a child less than 18 years of age whose parent or guardian, as herein defined, (1) inflicts or allows to be inflicted upon such child physical injury by other than accidental means which causes or creates a substantial risk of death, or serious or protracted disfigurement, or protracted impairment of physical or emotional health or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily organ; (2) creates or allows to be created a substantial or ongoing risk of physical injury to such child by other than accidental means which would be likely to cause death or serious or protracted disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily organ; (3) commits or allows to be committed an act of sexual abuse against the child; (4) or a child whose physical, mental, or emotional condition has been impaired or is in imminent danger of becoming impaired as the result of the failure of his parent or guardian, as herein defined, to exercise a minimum degree of care (a) in supplying the child with adequate food, clothing, shelter, education, medical or surgical care though financially able to do so or though offered financial or other reasonable means to do so, or (b) in providing the child with proper supervision or guardianship, by unreasonably inflicting or allowing to be inflicted harm, or substantial risk thereof, including the infliction of excessive corporal punishment; or by any other acts of a similarly serious nature requiring the aid of the court; (5) or a child who has been willfully abandoned by his parent or guardian, as herein defined; (6) or a child upon whom excessive physical restraint has been used under circumstances which do not indicate that the child's behavior is harmful to himself, others or property; (7) or a child who is in an institution and (a) has been placed there inappropriately for a continued period of time with the knowledge that the placement has resulted or may continue to result in harm to the child's mental or physical well-being or (b) who has been willfully isolated from ordinary social contact under circumstances which indicate emotional or social deprivation.

A child shall not be considered abused or neglected pursuant to paragraph (7) of subsection c. of this section if the acts or omissions described therein occur in a day school as defined in this section.

No child who in good faith is under treatment by spiritual means alone through prayer in accordance with the tenets and practices of a recognized church or religious denomination by a duly accredited practitioner thereof shall for this reason alone be considered to be abused or neglected.

d."Law guardian" means an attorney admitted to the practice of law in this State, regularly employed by the Office of the Public Defender or appointed by the court, and designated under this act to represent minors in alleged cases of child abuse or neglect and in termination of parental rights proceedings.

e."Attorney" means an attorney admitted to the practice of law in this State who shall be privately retained; or, in the instance of an indigent parent or guardian, an attorney from the Office of the Public Defender or an attorney appointed by the court who shall be appointed in order to avoid conflict between the interests of the child and the parent or guardian in regard to representation.

f."Division" means the Division of Youth and Family Services in the Department of Children and Families unless otherwise specified.

g."Institution" means a public or private facility in the State which provides children with out of home care, supervision or maintenance. Institution includes, but is not limited to, a correctional facility, detention facility, treatment facility, day care center, residential school, shelter and hospital.

h."Day school" means a public or private school which provides general or special educational services to day students in grades kindergarten through 12. Day school does not include a residential facility, whether public or private, which provides care on a 24-hour basis.

L.1974, c.119, s.1; amended 1977, c.209, s.1; 1987, c.341, s.6; 1994, c.58, s.39; 1999, c.53, s.55; 2004, c.130, s.27; 2005, c.169, s.1; 2006, c.47, s.47.

9:6-8.22 Jurisdiction of Superior Court, Chancery Division, Family Part.

2.The Superior Court, Chancery Division, Family Part in each county shall have jurisdiction over all noncriminal proceedings involving alleged cases of child abuse or neglect, and shall be charged with the immediate protection of said children, whereby the safety of the children shall be of paramount concern. All noncriminal cases involving child abuse shall be commenced in or transferred to this court from other courts as they are made known to the other courts. Commencement of cases of child abuse or neglect must be the first order of priority in the Family Part.

L.1974,c.119,s.2; amended 1977, c.209, s.2; 1991, c.91, s.198; 1999, c.53, s.6.

9:6-8.23. Law guardian; appointment
3. a. Any minor who is the subject of a child abuse or neglect proceeding under this act must be represented by a law guardian to help protect his interests and to help him express his wishes to the court. However, nothing in this act shall be construed to preclude any other interested person or agency from appearing by counsel.

b. The Superior Court, Chancery Division, Family Part, on its own motion, will make appointments of law guardians.

Volunteers needed for Metuchen Public Defender

2010-01-31T14:10:00.001-08:00

Volunteers needed for Metuchen Public Defender

The Public Defenders provide Indigent individuals charged with criminal or serious motor vehicle charges with free or limited cost legal defense. The Public Defender of Metuchen invites persons interested in helping others or getting experience in law/ criminal justice to apply to serve as volunteer interns. Volunteer Law Clerk interns will attend Wednesday evening and occasional Friday morning court sessions.

VOLUNTEER LEGAL INTERNS NEEDED
PUBLIC DEFENDER OF METUCHEN

Court times: WEDNESDAY 1pm PM [approx]- 8:30 PM, every other Friday 9-12, plus hearing preparation work.

Volunteer Internship Description:

-Interview Clients facing charges in Municipal Court including Drug Possession, Drunk Driving, Assault, Driving While Suspended and other criminal and traffic offenses

-Make demands for Discovery on Prosecutor and review police reports

-Attend hearings and learn from experienced trial attorneys

-Prepare Motions to Suppress Evidence and Motions to Compel Discovery
-Conduct appropriate Legal research
-Acquire skills in Criminal Law and Procedure by active participation
-Participate in Public Relations activities and help organize seminars
- Update Lists of Prosecutors, Judges and Attorneys for publication of
NJ Municipal Court Law Review
- Revise criminal and traffic law Articles and submit to Law Journals and criminal law websites.
- Learn how to add criminal statutes and criminal articles to legal blogs and websites.

Volunteer to help indigent people charged with criminal and motor vehicle offenses of magnitude. In additional to time in court, you will be given research assignments. You can work more hours if you want. Help people less fortunate than you who are down on their luck. This is an unpaid internship helping indigent persons.
Program lasts 12 weeks. Minimum time commitment September- May is 10 hours per week.
For Summer- College graduates and Law students only. Minimum Volunteer time commitment in summer- 18 hours per week. Send cover letter and resume. After sending resume, call to schedule interview
732-572-0500.
We sponsor a state wide website www.njlaws.com with information on criminal, litigation, personal injury, and probate matters. It is helpful if applicants have some familiarity with HTML programming, web page design and maintenance and Internet technology. If you can update a website, please indicate so in the first paragraph of your cover letter. This office is committed to excellence and service to clients and the community. Applicants must have attention to detail. We attempt to give assignments which will be meaningful and memorable but, nevertheless, expect that interns will pitch in on whatever needs to be done.
Interested students must mail or fax a cover letter indicating the internship they are applying for and resume. If no personal cover letter by student, the resume will not be considered.
Details on internships at http://www.njlaws.com/intern.htm

Mail or fax cover letter and resume to
Kenneth Vercammen, Esq.
Public Defender for the Borough of Metuchen
c/o 2053 Woodbridge Ave., Edison, NJ 08817
Fax 732-572-0030

http://www.kennethvercammen.com/Public-Defender-volunteer.html

Defending a Juvenile Delinquency Case

2010-01-24T09:32:00.000-08:00

Defending a Juvenile Delinquency Case

By Kenneth A. Vercammen
Handling juvenile delinquency cases is becoming a sub-specialty that requires special knowledge of the juvenile justice system. Juvenile cases are difficult to handle for different reasons: (1) The juveniles often refuse to admit to their attorney any participation in the offense despite clear guilt, (2) The parents sometimes refuse to acknowledge their child’s involvement, and (3) different
rules and court systems are involved.
When the client is first in the office,
have him fill out an interview sheet. After reviewing the complaint and the interview
sheet, ask a series of questions of the client. You should request the client wait until the end of the interview before explaining their side of the story. Also ask them if there is anything else of importance
in connection with the case that you should know. The client may have pending serious criminal charges in another
state or county. The ABA-adopted Rules of Professional Conduct indicate a retainer letter or written statement of fees is required for new clients.
As a recommendation, have the client provide you with a list of between 10 to 15 reasons why they should not go to jail and why the court should impose the minimum license suspension. This provides you with information for mitigation
and penalties and also provides information
to be considered by the judge in sentencing.
Who Is the Client?
The client must be the juvenile charged. It is not the parent or grandmother
who pays the bills. It is important to preserve the confidence of the client. Let the juvenile know that they can call you whenever they want, and that you will not tell their parents anything told in confidence.
Discovery in nonmotor vehicle cases is requested in writing to the county prosecutor, not the town municipal prosecutor.
Motor vehicle charges alone are heard by the municipal court judge and handled by the municipal prosecutor.
Trial Call is the next appearance
and the defense counsel will receive discovery, if it has not previously been received. Applicable motions should be filed prior to the trial call: Motion to Suppress, Compel Additional Discovery, Dismiss Complaint, etc.
Juveniles have most of the same rights under the Constitution as adults: Fourth Amendment — no unreasonable searches; Fifth Amendment — right to remain silent; Sixth Amendment — right to attorney and the right to cross-examine
witnesses. However, unlike adults, juveniles do not have a right to a jury trial and do not have to post bail.
It is a popular misconception that juvenile arrests are automatically erased when the juvenile turns 18. The criminal “charge,” even if later dismissed, stays on their record forever unless they have their attorney file a formal petition for expungement.
M
iranda Warning and Confessions
Police must provide a Miranda warning to juveniles. Two recent cases drastically change that require counsel prior to custodial interrogation:
1. State in the Interest of P.M.P., 200 N.J. 166 (2009): The filing of the complaint and the obtaining of a judicially
approved arrest warrant by the Camden County Prosecutor’s Office was a critical stage in the proceedings, and pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2A:4A-39B(1), P.M.P. had the right to counsel and could not waive that right except in the presence of and after consultation with his attorney. Therefore, the trial court properly granted P.M.P.’s motion to suppress his statement.
2. State of in the Interest of A.S,
CRIMINAL LAW
Defending a Juvenile Delinquency Case
Vercammen is a trial attorney in Edison. He often lectures for the New Jersey State Bar Association, New Jersey
Institute for Continuing Legal Education
and Middlesex County College on personal injury, criminal/municipal court law, drunk driving and contested probate estate administration.
R
eprinted with permission from the NOVEMEMBERER 23, 2009 edition of New Jersey Law Journal. © 2009 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All rights reserved. Further duplication without permission is prohibited.
409 N.J.Super. 99 ( 2009): The court suppressed
the confession of the 14-year-old adoptive daughter of F.D., who committed an act of fellatio upon F.D.’s four-year-old grandson, because in incorrectly explaining
the daughter’s Miranda rights and in participating in her interrogation, F.D. placed the interests of her grandson ahead of the interests of her daughter. The court suggested that in circumstances in which a parent has a conflict of interest arising from a familial relationship to both the alleged
juvenile perpetrator and victim, an attorney should represent the juvenile during
any custodial interrogation.
T
he Offense and Arrest
Police are permitted to arrest if they see a crime or are provided with information
that a juvenile committed a crime. The police then sign a complaint form, which later is forwarded to the Superior Court, Family Part, in the county where the juvenile lives. Generally, the juvenile will be released to the custody of parents or guardians. Rule 5:21-5. A person is a juvenile for delinquency purposes until his/her 18 birthday. For serious crimes, if the juvenile is a threat to themselves or the community, or if the juvenile is a habitual offender, they can be brought to the county juvenile detention center. They will remain in detention until released by the Superior Court Judge at a recall hearing,
after a probable cause hearing or at the conclusion of the case. It is rare and serious when a juvenile is held at the detention
center.
Diversion of Criminal Charges
In many counties, the county prosecutor’s office screens each complaint initially, but staff within the family court can make the decision to divert the case or not. Diversion for many cases means removing them from court altogether and sending them for total handling to a Juvenile
Conference Committee (J.C.C.) or intake
service conference. See the Criminal Justice System, “Guide for School Personnel,”
Middlesex County Prosecutor’s Office, p. 20 (1996).
For juveniles with prior charges or more serious charges, the case is put on the formal trial calendar. These proceedings
resemble adult criminal proceedings. The juvenile must be represented by an attorney
and the state is represented by an assistant prosecutor.
In a “deferred adjudication” the judge may direct the juvenile to perform a job, write an essay, be on unsupervised probation, or direct other requirements. The juvenile must earn dismissal by fulfilling
conditions such as restitution, community
service, counseling, or school attendance.
Post-Interview Preparation
Also make a motion to suppress where there is a question regarding the validity of a stop or search. New Jersey will also permit you to make a motion to dismiss on de minimis infractions for nonsubstantial
offenses (i.e., shoplifting one candy bar). Any other motions to dismiss should be made in writing, such as statute of limitations or lack of jurisdiction.
Preparing for Trial
If it is a drug case, we may make an objection to the entry of the lab certificate
as evidence at trial. We are also under a responsibility to provide any reciprocal discovery to the prosecutor. Occasionally, we will call the prosecutor ahead of time to see if a matter can be worked out or plea bargained.
Formal Trial
If the case goes to trial, the judge serves as the fact-finder and makes all decisions, unlike adult court where those charged can have a jury trial. The trial is held before a Superior Court judge in the county where the juvenile resides. Rule 5:19-1.
Another major difference in juvenile
cases is that the prosecutor does not make binding sentencing recommendations
as part of a plea bargain. The judge has total discretion regarding the sentence imposed. If the juvenile pleads guilty or is found delinquent (guilty), the judge has the discretion on sentence — deferred adjudication,
probation, incarceration, residential
placement, restitution, fine, etc.
Relatively few juveniles are currently
incarcerated but the number may increase as legislative changes require jail terms for juveniles who commit certain
offenses, such as auto thefts and for juveniles who continue to commit more and more heinous offenses.
For the most serious crimes, the county prosecutor can make a motion to remove to the adult criminal court. Rule 5:22-1, Rule 5:22-2.
First Appearance in Formal Trial Cases
The court itself will send a copy of the complaint to the juvenile’s parents and a mandatory notice to appear for an interview for public defender eligibility. The public defender handles only indigent
cases, juveniles whose parents are on welfare, unemployed, and have no assets.
This mandatory appearance is unnecessary once the client retains an attorney
and the attorney sends in a notice of appearance.
Plea to a Lesser Offense
If the client is going to enter a guilty plea to any offense, it is important that they understand what the offense is and put a factual basis on the record. Letters of reference and character reference
letters are helpful in cases where the judge has wide discretion in his sentencing.
After the client pleads guilty, it is a good idea to also ask the client on the record
if he has any questions of you or of the court.
Juvenile trials are heard in the Superior Court without a jury. Defense counsel should bring Court Rule 5 dealing with family court juvenile cases to court. Always do you best for every client. Seek proposed resolutions which assist in the rehabilitation of your juvenile.■
Published in NEW JERSEY LAW JOURNAL, NOVEMBER 23, 2009 198 N.J.L.J. 722 Reprinted with permission

Juvenile Delinquency Proceedings

2010-01-24T05:15:00.000-08:00

Juvenile
Delinquency
Proceedings
and
Your Child
A Guide for
Parents and Guardians

WHAT IS JUVENILE DELINQUENCY?
Delinquency is defined as an act by a juvenile under the age of 18
that if committed by an adult would constitute a crime, a disorderly
persons offense, a petty disorderly persons offense, or a violation
of any other penal statute, ordinance or regulation.

WHAT ARE THE COURT’S GOALS IN RESOLVING JUVENILE
DELINQUENCY CASES?
In juvenile matters, the court’s goals are rehabilitation and
accountability. The court handles each case on an individual basis
according to the law and based on the individual circumstances of
the case.

WHY IS MY CHILD IN THE COURT SYSTEM?
Your child will be appearing in court because someone has
accused your child of committing an act that is against the law in
New Jersey. The court will provide you with a copy of the
complaint, a legal court document describing the alleged illegal
conduct.
In the majority of cases, police sign complaints based on either
personal observation or information supplied by others such as
victims. Complaints also can be signed by school officials or
victims or by probation officers in cases of violations of probation
(VOPs).

CAN MY CHILD BE HELD IN A JUVENILE FACILITY BASED
UPON THE SIGNING OF A COMPLAINT?
A child may be taken into custody and held in a juvenile facility
based on the nature of the offense, the need to protect society, a
past record of adjudications of delinquency, a recent failure to
appear at court proceedings, or failure to remain where placed by
the court or court intake service.
If your child is not held in a shelter or detention setting, you will
receive notice of when and where to appear to address the
charge(s).

DOES MY CHILD NEED A LAWYER?
A parent, guardian, or caregiver should always consider
consulting an attorney for any legal matter or court appearance
although not all cases require an attorney.

In all formal court hearings before a judge, your child must have an
attorney. This type of proceeding is known as a counsel mandatory
or formal court hearing. If there is a possibility of
removing your child from home, the court will require your child to
be represented by an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney,
you must, on behalf of your child, submit an application known as a
5A form to the court to determine if your child is eligible to receive
the services of a public defender or a court-appointed attorney. If
you fail to appear as required by the court to complete an
application for assignment of counsel, the court may issue a
warrant for your arrest.

WHAT HAPPENS IF MY CHILD IS DETAINED?
At times, the court may need to place your child in a detention
facility. If your child is held, an initial detention hearing will take
place as soon as possible but no later than the following day after
placement. At the hearing, you and your child will be told what the
charges are and whether or not an attorney will be required to
represent your child. The charges are listed on the complaint. You
and your child will have a chance to ask questions about the
process. At the end of this hearing, the court will make a decision
about releasing or holding your child. A parent or guardian is
expected to be present at all hearings.

WHAT HAPPENS IF MY CHILD IS NOT RELEASED AFTER THE
INITIAL DETENTION HEARING?
If your child is not released following the initial detention hearing,
another hearing will be held within two working days, unless
waived. At that time, your child must be represented by an
attorney. The judge will decide whether to continue holding your
child in detention. At the hearing, the prosecutor must present
enough evidence to satisfy the judge that the offense occurred and
that there is enough reason to believe that your child committed the
offense. If the judge is not satisfied on either count, then the judge
could dismiss the complaint. If the judge is satisfied with the
evidence presented, the case will be scheduled for a hearing.
If your child is held, a detention review hearing with your child’s
attorney present must be held within 14 days of the prior hearing.
If your child stays in detention, the judge must hold detention
review hearings every 21 court days (or less).

WHAT HAPPENS IF MY CHILD IS RELEASED AFTER THE
INITIAL DETENTION HEARING?
If your child is not detained after the initial detention hearing,
another court appearance will be scheduled. At that time, you,
your child and, if applicable, his or her attorney must appear before
the judge to answer the charges in the complaint.

CAN I ARRANGE FOR BAIL?
No, bail is not available for juveniles.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
Court personnel will review the matter and determine how the case
will be handled.
HOW CAN THE COURT PROCESS MY CHILD’S CASE?
The court makes decisions on how cases are handled based on
the nature and seriousness of the offense, age of your child, any
prior record, and willingness of parties to cooperate. Cases are
handled in one of the following ways.
A. Juvenile Conference Committee (JCC) or Intake Services
Conference (ISC)
B. Juvenile referee/Informal court
C. Judge/Formal court

A. Juvenile Conference Committee
or Intake Services Conference
A delinquency complaint can be referred to a Juvenile Conference
Committee or Intake Services Conference. A Juvenile Conference
Committee is a trained citizen volunteer panel appointed by the
court. An Intake Services Conference is conducted by a Judiciary
staff person. The parent, the juvenile and the person who filed the
complaint are invited to discuss the offense and other related
factors. The committee or intake officer does not have the
authority to determine delinquency. This is an informal discussion
of the events and all parties must be in agreement. Attorneys are
not required. There is no chance of your child being sent away to a
juvenile facility. The disposition recommendations will be placed
on an agreement/court order signed by your child, you as his or her
parent/legal guardian, and the person who filed the complaint. This
agreement will then be forwarded to the judge for final approval.
The resolution of the case can include conditions such as curfew,
counseling, evaluation, community service, restitution, or any
condition that will aid in your child's rehabilitation. If the parties do
not agree to the proposed conditions, the terms can be discussed
and changed to all parties’ satisfaction. If all agree to the
conditions, a juvenile conference committee or intake staff person
will monitor the completion of the conditions. If the parties cannot
come to an agreement, the case may be sent back to the judge.
Upon successful completion of the agreed-upon conditions, the
case is dismissed. However, If your child fails to complete the
conditions or new complaints are signed prior to dismissal, the
original complaint will go back to court to be heard by a judge.

B. Juvenile Referee/Informal Court
A juvenile referee conducts a hearing at which your child will be
expected to admit or deny that he or she did what is alleged in the
complaint. If necessary, the juvenile referee will make a finding of
the facts and a determination of delinquency. The referee will
make a recommendation to the judge regarding the finding and
disposition. Dispositions that the referee recommends are subject
to approval by the judge and include those available in matters
handled by a judge with the exception of out-of-home placement. If
you disagree with the findings of the juvenile referee, you must tell
the referee immediately at the end of the hearing before the
findings and recommendations are sent to the judge.

C. Judge/Formal Court Calendar
A judge oversees the court hearing. At this hearing, your child will
be expected to enter a plea admitting or denying the charge.
These court cases are placed on the judge’s informal calendar or
on the formal calendar. If the case is on the informal calendar, also
known as counsel non-mandatory, your child may have a lawyer,
but it is not a requirement. If the case is on the formal calendar,
also known as counsel-mandatory, you must hire a lawyer. If you
cannot afford one, you will be advised to complete a 5A form to
determine eligibility for a public defender. Public defender
representation for juveniles facing delinquency charges is not free,
and you may be billed for services performed by the public
defender’s office. You should talk to your child’s public defender
about what your financial obligations will be.
If you do not apply for a public defender or do not qualify, a lawyer
will be assigned to represent your child. You will be required to pay
the lawyer at the end of the case. If the facts in the case are
disputed, the judge will decide the case. If the judge finds your
child delinquent, the judge will impose a disposition in accordance
with New Jersey law. If you disagree with the judge’s decision, you
can file an appeal within 45 days.

The court can order any disposition to aid in your child’s
rehabilitation and to reinforce your child’s accountability including
fines, community service and/or a term of supervision such as
probation, deferred disposition, or a period of confinement.
Probation offers juveniles the opportunity to remain in the
community under supervision by a probation officer who oversees
their compliance with rules and conditions imposed by the judge.
Probation can last for a period of up to three years. If your child
does not obey the conditions of probation, there will be
consequences such as increased probation reporting or a curfew
and your child could be charged with a violation of probation
(VOP). If all conditions are met and your child shows significant
progress, your child may earn an earlier end to the probation term.
In some instances, formal disposition can be deferred or delayed
for up to one year. During this period, your child must complete
any special conditions ordered by the judge and must not be
charged with a new offense. If he or she meets all conditions
during the deferral period, the complaint will be dismissed. If
conditions are not met, the original complaint will go back to court
and be heard by the judge.

In addition, for cases on the formal counsel mandatory calendar
only, the judge also has the option to order a period of confinement
in a juvenile detention facility, incarceration in a correctional facility
for youth, out-of-home placement, or a clinical residential treatment
or residential drug and alcohol treatment program. Although the
judge has the power to confine or incarcerate your child, this does
not mean that the judge will choose this as an option if your child is
found delinquent. The judge must order a pre-disposition report to
be completed by a court officer. This report will help the judge
determine the appropriate disposition. When there is a chance of
incarceration, your child must be represented by an attorney, and
you may direct questions to the attorney.

WHAT HAPPENS IF MY CHILD AND I CANNOT KEEP
A COURT DATE?
Notice of court dates will be given to you in advance. You, your
child or your child’s lawyer, if he or she has one, must notify the
court when your child cannot appear. If the court is not notified, the
judge can issue a warrant for your child’s arrest.

CAN MY CHILD OR I PRESENT WITNESSES?
Juvenile Conference Committee/Intake Services Conference: Yes,
you can invite witnesses, but witnesses are not required. Contact
the phone number listed on your notice for information or the
Juvenile Intake Unit for your county

Juvenile referee/Informal court: Yes, you can present witnesses.
Contact the juvenile team leader at the telephone number listed on
the court notice for information.
Judge/Formal court: Yes, please consult with your child’s lawyer.

WHAT HAPPENS AT THE HEARING?
If the judge finds that your child has committed the offense(s)
charged, the judge will enter a finding known as an adjudication
and make a decision known as entering a disposition.

WHAT DISPOSITIONS OR CONSEQUENCES CAN THE
COURT IMPOSE ON MY CHILD?
The dispositions and consequences that the court could impose on
your child in order to rehabilitate him/her and prevent future
delinquency include but are not limited to:
• adjourned disposition;
• community service;
• diversion;
• fines;
• probation;
• release to parent or guardian;
• required support services;
• required parental involvement;
• residential mental health and/or substance abuse and
alcohol treatment;
• restitution;
• transfer of custody;
• secure confinement/incarceration;
• suspension of driver’s license; and
• work, outdoor, academic, and/or vocational programs.
In some types of juvenile cases, there are mandatory dispositions,
and in some types of offenses, such as certain drug-related
matters, fines must be imposed by the court.

DOES MY CHILD HAVE THE RIGHT TO APPEAL?
If your child disagrees with the outcomes of the case, he or she has
the right to appeal the findings of the court within 45 days of the
final court order. Information on appeals can be found on the
Judiciary Web site at www.njcourts.com.

CAN A JUVENILE RECORD BE EXPUNGED?
For certain juvenile matters, expungement is permitted if five years
have passed since the final discharge of the person from legal
custody or supervision or if five years have passed since the entry
of any other court order not involving custody or supervision.
Certain offenses may not be expunged. For general information
regarding expungements, visit the Judiciary’s Web site at
www.judiciary.state.nj.us/prose/10557_expunge_kit.pdf, and for
information relating to your child’s specific case, consult an
attorney.

ARE JUVENILE COURT RECORDS CONFIDENTIAL?
Under New Jersey law, juvenile records are available only to
certain judicial, law enforcement, and governmental agencies as
specified in N.J.S.A. 2A:4A-60. Any other agency or person can
only have access to the records by making a motion before a judge
for good cause. You should be aware that the charge, adjudication,
and disposition information is available to victims, law enforcement
agencies, and schools. Further, if your child applies for certain
types of military, government, or law enforcement services, he or
she may be asked to disclose his or her juvenile record.

WILL THERE BE A RECORD OF MY CHILD’S
FINGERPRINTS AND DNA?
Yes, in most cases there will be a record of your child's fingerprints
and DNA. Juveniles who are found to be delinquent for an act that
if committed by an adult would be a crime by law must provide
fingerprints and a DNA sample. You should ask your child’s lawyer
about your child’s situation.

REMINDERS
• You should always make certain that the court
system in addition to your child’s attorney has your
correct address and telephone number. Contact the
number listed on the court notice or the Juvenile
Intake Unit listed on page 12 to advise of any changes
to your child’s address and/or telephone number.
• If you think that you or your child has been treated
unfairly or disrespectfully, you can contact the family
division manager or ombudsman.
• The vicinage ombudsman is also available to assist
with related concerns and questions. Contact
information is listed on page 12 of this publication.
At any time during a juvenile justice proceeding,
your child has the right to legal representation.

GLOSSARY

TERM DEFINITION
adjudication- A determination by a judge that a
juvenile has or has not committed the
charge(s) listed in the complaint.
allegation An accusation included on the
complaint form. When your child is
alleged to have committed an offense,
the state is required to prove that the
allegation is true.

complaint -A document filed with the court
accusing a person of a crime or
violation of the law. The complaint
contains the charge made against your
child.

counsel-mandatory
hearing
A court appearance in which the law
requires your child to have a lawyer.
This also is known as a formal hearing.

counsel nonmandatory
hearing
A court appearance in which the law
does not require your child to have a
lawyer, although it is always advisable
to consult with a lawyer. This also is
known as an informal hearing.
delinquency An act by a juvenile under the age of 18
that if committed by an adult would
constitute a crime, a disorderly persons
offense, a petty disorderly persons
offense, or a violation of any other
statute, ordinance, or regulation.
diversion or diverted
complaint
The reviewers of the complaint have
determined that the charge is not
serious enough to require going before
a judge or juvenile referee, so the
matter is sent to an alternative program
such as a Juvenile Conference
Committee for potential resolution.

formal court hearing- A court appearance in which the law
requires your child to have a lawyer.
This also is known as a counselmandatory
hearing.
informal court hearing A court appearance in which the law
does not require your child to have a
lawyer, although it is always advisable
to consult with a lawyer. This also is
known as a counsel non-mandatory
hearing.
incarceration Your child is confined in a juvenile
detention facility or youth correctional
facility.

waiving a right/waiver
of a right
Giving up the right to a process or
procedure such as a hearing.
waiver to be tried as
an adult
The transfer of a juvenile delinquency
charge to criminal court for processing
as an adult.
warrant A court order instructing the police to
pick up and transport your child to a
detention center, shelter or to the
courthouse for a hearing.
disposition A court-ordered outcome or resolution
to a case for juveniles is called a
disposition and for adults is called a
sentence.
detained or
in detention
Your child is being held in a detention
center or in a shelter facility.
public defender A defense attorney who can be
assigned to represent your child.
Public defender representation for
juveniles facing delinquency charges is
not free, and you may be billed for
services performed by the public
defender’s office.

Source: http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/family/juvenilebooklet.pdf
COUNTY Family Division,
Superior Court
Juvenile Intake
Unit Ombudsman
Atlantic (609) 345-6700
x3451
(609) 345-6700
x3318 or 3305
(609) 345-6700
x3346
Bergen (201) 527-2501 (201) 527-2323 (201) 527-2734
Burlington (609) 518-2691 (609) 518-2680 (609) 518-2530
Camden (856) 379-2331 (856) 379-2200
x3651 (856) 379-2238
Cape May (609) 345-6700
x3451 (609) 463-6612 (609) 345-6700
x3346
Cumberland (856) 453-4580 (856) 453-4544 (856) 453-4538
Essex (973) 693-6667 (973) 693-6775 (973) 693-5728
Gloucester (856) 453-4580 (856) 686-7430 (856) 453-4538
Hudson (201) 795-6779 (201) 795-6745 (201) 217-5399
Hunterdon (908) 231-7617 (908) 237-5926 (908) 203-6131
Mercer (609) 571-4379 (609) 571-4390 (609) 571-4205
Middlesex (732) 519-3266 (732) 519-3266 (732) 519-3344
Monmouth (732) 677-4304 (732) 677-4091 (732) 677-4209
Morris (973) 656-4307 (973) 656-4308 (973) 656-3969
Ocean (732) 929-2042 (732) 929-4717 (732) 288-7212
Passaic (973) 247-8459 (973) 247-8459 (973) 247-8651
Salem (856) 453-4580 (856) 935-7510 (856) 453-4538
Somerset (908) 231-7617 (908) 231-7637 (908) 203-6131
Sussex (973) 656-4307 (973) 579-0615 (973) 656-3969
Union (908) 659-5800 (908) 659-5860 (908) 659-4646
Warren (908) 231-7617 (908) 475-6167 (908) 203-6131

KENNETH VERCAMMEN – resume and community involvement

2009-11-14T16:21:00.000-08:00

KENNETH VERCAMMEN – resume and community involvement
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500
www.njlaws.com
Kenneth Vercammen is an Edison, Middlesex County, NJ trial attorney who has published 125 articles in national and New Jersey publications on probate, estate planning, criminal and litigation topics. He often lectures to trial lawyers of the American Bar Association, New Jersey State Bar Association and Middlesex County Bar Association.
Kenneth Vercammen was the NJ State Bar Municipal Court Attorney of the Year and past president of the Middlesex County Municipal Prosecutor's Association.   He is the past chair of the NJ State Bar Association Municipal Court Section. He is the Deputy chair of the ABA Criminal Law committee, GP Division. Kenneth Vercammen was included in the “Super Lawyers” list published by Thomson Reuters
He is a highly regarded lecturer on litigation issues for the American Bar Association, ICLE, New Jersey State Bar Association and Middlesex County Bar Association. His articles have been published by New Jersey Law Journal, ABA Law Practice Management Magazine, and New Jersey Lawyer. He is the Editor in Chief of the New Jersey Municipal Court Law Review. Mr. Vercammen is a recipient of the NJSBA- YLD Service to the Bar Award. He has successfully handled over One thousand Municipal Court and Superior Court matters in the past 18 years.

Since 1985, his primary concentration has been on litigation matters. Mr. Vercammen gained other legal experiences as the Confidential Law Clerk to the Court of Appeals of Maryland (Supreme Court),with the Delaware County, PA District Attorney Office handling Probable Cause Hearings, Middlesex County Probation Dept as a Probation Officer, and an Executive Assistant to Scranton District Magistrate, Thomas Hart, in Scranton, PA. He started his career as a trial attorney for Drazin & Warshaw in Hazlet and Red Bank, NJ, and Borrus, Goldin, Foley, Vignuolo, Hyman & Stahl in North Brunswick.

ADMISSIONS: Admitted In NJ, NY, PA, US Supreme Court and Federal District Court

MANAGING ATTORNEY Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, PC March 1990-Present
Full service Law practice with offices in Edison and Cranbury.

PROSECUTOR Township of Cranbury, Middlesex County, NJ 1991-1999
Municipal Prosecutor for criminal and traffic cases involving Township and State Police
-Acting Assoc. Prosecutor: Carteret Municipal Court, Middlesex County, NJ 2000

EDITOR- NJ MUNICIPAL COURT LAW REVIEW 1993- present

Middlesex County Bar Association 2008 Municipal Court Attorney of the Year

NJ State Bar Association- 2005-2006 Municipal Court Attorney of the Year Award

New Jersey Super Lawyers selection 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006

Who's Who in America 2004

NJ State Bar Association- 2002 General Practitioner of the Year Award

1993 AWARD WINNER "Service to the Bar Award"- New Jersey State Bar Association YLD

RELEVANT LITIGATION SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS:
-Criminal, DWI and Drug Cases- NJ State Bar Annual Meeting 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 01, 00, 99
-Civil Trial Practice- Middlesex Bar 2004
-Personal Injury Litigation- NJ Institute for Continuing Legal Education/ NJ State Bar
2001, 2000,1999,1998,1997,1996,1995,1994,1993,1991
-Municipal Court Handling Serious Cases ICLE/NJSBA-2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002,2001,2000,1998,1997,1995,1994
-NJ Association of Municipal Court Administrators 2002
-Edison Police Auxiliary- Search and Seizure 2002
-New Jersey Network TV- Due Process TV show 2000
-Cablevision TV- Law on the Line 2003, 2001
-Elder Law and Probate NJSBA/ ICLE 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 03,02,01,99,98,97,96

PUBLICATIONS:
Published 150 separate Law Review and Legal Periodical articles in legal journals such as New Jersey Law Journal, American Bar Association Barrister, New Jersey Lawyer, ABA Law Practice Management, and New Jersey State Bar Association's Dictum. Listed on www.njlaws.com.

KENNETH VERCAMMEN, ESQ.

RECENT SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS ON WILLS, ELDER LAW, AND PROBATE
East Brunswick Adult School 2009, 2008
Middlesex County Police Chiefs 2009- Living Wills
Middlesex County College- Wills & Probate 2007
Edison Adult School -Wills, Elder Law & Probate- 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002 [inc Edison TV], 2001, 2000,1999,1998,1997
- Nuts & Bolts of Elder Law - NJ Institute for Continuing Legal Education/ NJ State Bar ICLE/NJSBA 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2000, 1999, 1996
-Elder Law and Estate Planning- American Bar Association New York City 2008, Miami 2007
South Plainfield Seniors- New Probate Law 2005, East Brunswick Seniors- New Probate Law 2005
Old Bridge AARP 2002; Guardian Angeles/ Edison 2002; St. Cecilia/ Woodbridge Seniors 2002;
East Brunswick/ Hall's Corner 2002;
-Linden AARP 2002
-Woodbridge Adult School -Wills and Estate Administration -2001, 2000,1999,1998,1997,1996
Woodbridge Housing 2001; Metuchen Seniors & Metuchen TV 2001; Frigidare/ Local 401 Edison 2001; Chelsea/ East Brunswick 2001, Village Court/ Edison 2001; Old Bridge Rotary 2001; Sacred Heart/ South Amboy 2001; Livingston Manor/ New Brunswick 2001; Sunrise East Brunswick 2001; Strawberry Hill/ Woodbridge 2001;
-Wills and Elder Law - Metuchen Adult School 1999,1997,1996,1995,1994,1993
-Clara Barton Senior Citizens- Wills & Elder Law-Edison 2002, 1995
-AARP Participating Attorney in Legal Plan for NJ AARP members 1999-2005
-Senior Legal Points University of Medicine & Dentistry UMDNJ & St. Peter's-2000, 1999,1998
-East Brunswick AARP Wills 2001; -Iselin/ Woodbridge AARP Wills 2000
-Metuchen Reformed Church; Franklin/ Somerset/ Quailbrook Seniors 2001
-North Brunswick Senior Day 2001
-Wills, Elder Law and Probate-South Brunswick Adult School & Channel 28 TV 1999, 1997,1993
-Wills and Estate Planning-Old Bridge Adult School 1998,1997,1995
-Senior Citizen Law-Perth Amboy YMHA 1995; Temple Beth Or 2002;
-Wills, Living Wills and Probate-Spotswood Community School 1995,1994,1993
-Wills and Probate-Sayreville Adult School 1997, 1996,1995,1994
-Living Wills-New Jersey State Bar Foundation and St. Demetrius, Carteret 1994
-Wills and Estate Planning-Edison Elks and Senior Citizens January 1994
-"Legal Questions Clinic" Metuchen Adult School March 1995,1994,1993
-Estate Planning to Protect Families-Metuchen Chamber of Commerce April 1993

SPECIAL ACTING PROSECUTOR: Woodbridge, East Brunswick, Metuchen, South Brunswick, Perth Amboy, Cranbury, South Plainfield, Clark, South River, Hightstown, Carteret, Jamesburg, Berkeley Heights on conflict matters. Past President- Middlesex Municipal Prosecutor's Association. Previous experience with the Delaware County, Pennsylvania District Attorney Office, Middlesex County Probation Department and Scranton District Magistrate Office.

Metuchen Public Defender 2001- present Edison Public Defender 1990-1991

KENNETH VERCAMMEN- Community Service

NON- PROFIT: -Edison Elks-Presiding Justice 1993- Present
-Y.B. CHOI TAE KWON DO (Korean Karate)- 4th degree Black Belt awarded 2008 3rd degree 2004 ; 2nd degree December 1993, 1st degree Black Belt December 2001
-Raritan Valley Road Runners- Comeback of the Year Award 2002 and ranked Master Distance Runner; state champion 20,000 meter team 2005

New Jersey State Age Group Champion Garden State Games 5,000 meter run 1993
-Bishop Ahr/St. Thomas Aquinas H.S. Alumni Society
Elected Vice-President 1989-1990; Class of 1977- 25 year Reunion Chair
-Edison 14th District Committeeman Elected 1988-1994
-St. Francis Cathedral- Church Lector 1990-1994
-University of Scranton, North Jersey Alumni Chapter Co-Chair, Fall Social 1988
-Knights of Columbus-Fourth Degree Knight, Edison Council
Edison NJ Essay Contest Chair 1992,1993
Metuchen Chamber of Commerce, Past member Edison Chamber of Commerce;
RUNNING:
Raritan Valley Road Runners RVRR Rumson HashHouse Harriers
Central Jersey Road Runners CJRR Jersey Shore Triathlon Club JSTC
Freehold Area Running Club FARC Scranton Area Organization Runners SOAR
Jersey Shore Running Club JSRC USATF- US Athletic Track & Field
Sandy Hook Triathlon Club First Place- Bergen Bar 5k Law Day Run May 2001 South Brunswick Running Group- President First Place- CJRR Summer 5K 2002
First Place: Cocoa Beach 2 mile 2008, 2007; Cranford Run for Lupus 4 mile 2006, JSRC Twilight run 2006. Indian Trials Middletown 3m 2005,2004; Stroudsburg 5k 2005, 2004; Wildwood 5k, Ocean Winter 4 mile, Edison Lannie 5k, 2004; Washington DC Run for Justice 5K 2002
CJRR Age group champ 2005,2004, 2002, 1996, 1995
New York Marathon top 100 NJ Finisher

ACTIVITIES: Married 1989, one son born 1991, daughter born 1994
Weekend Road Running Races, Triathlons, Soccer
Tae Kwon Do Karate

SOUTH BRUNSWICK AREA
Summer Blast/Ireland Brook Neighborhood Sponsor
So. Brunswick Soccer Asst. Coach Travel 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001, 2000, 1999, 98
So. Brunswick Athletic Assoc.-Team Sponsor and helper with son's team
So. Brunswick Viking 5k- volunteer
South Brunswick 5K running Race volunteer
So. Brunswick Bicentennial Volunteer
Neighborhood Picnic Sponsor 1998-2009
So. Brunswick 50 Mile Bike Volunteer and 50 mile Finisher
Holt for Congress Volunteer

CHARITABLE: American Cancer Society-Chairman
Annual Summer Fundraiser Picnic- 1987,88,89,90,91,92
Chairman, Annual Christmas Fundraiser- 1987,88,89,90,911,92
Recipient-Young Professionals Award-Sept. 1988, Sept. 1989
Board of Manager's - 1989-1994 Founder and Chair-Young Professionals Group

KENNETH VERCAMMEN, ESQ. Education & Awards

LEGAL EDUCATION: The Widener/ Delaware Law School, J.D., May 1985
Class Rank: Top Ten Percent
Awards: Honor Grades: Federal Income Tax, Business Organization, Criminal Law, Advanced Advocacy, Family Law, New Jersey Practice, Unfair Trade Practices, Professional Liability.
Outstanding Service Award Recipient in Graduation Ceremony
Delaware Merit Scholarship - 1983, 1984
Provincial Winner - Phi Delta Phi Legal Honor Fraternity Graduate of the Year Award
Who's Who in American Law Schools

ACTIVITIES:
Law Review- Senior Staff-Member
Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, Senior Editor 1984-1985
Winner - Sixth Annual Trial Advocacy Competition
First Prize - Delaware Law School/ATLA Environmental Law Essay Contest
Delaware Law Forum, Casenote Editor

Working Scholar- Hon. Philip Gruccio, Assignment Judge of Atlantic, Cumberland, Cape May, Salem Counties
Association of Trial Lawyers of America, Delaware Chapter Treasurer
Law School Running Club - President
Research Assistant - Dean Arthur Weeks
Publications- Published in Law Review and wrote more articles than 75% of law faculty members

PRELEGAL EDUCATION: University of Scranton B.S., January 1981
Major: Political Science: Graduated Cum Laude in 3-1/2 years
Honors:
- Cited in Who's Who in American Colleges and Universities;
- Dean's List; Pi Gamma Mu Honor Society; Pi Sigma Alpha Honor Society.
- Varsity Cross- Country - Team Captain and Record Holder of Indoor Half-Mile
- District Magistrate Thomas Hart- Paid Law Clerk/ Executive Assistant
- Pre-Law Society Public Relations Director
- Voter Registration Drive Coordinator
- Internship with Pa. Representative Hon. Fred Belardi
- School Newspaper Staff and Sportswriter
- WYRE radio station sports caster
- 3rd Place Wrestling Tournament
- Campus Bowl Intellectual Competition (Team Captain)
- Trustee Day Volunteer, Red Cross Blood Drive Volunteer
- Senior Class - Hard Rockers Social Committee Chair
-Alumni Society-Estate Planning Council 1997-Present
- Class of 1981 20 year Reunion Executive Committee member 2001 -25 Year Reunion Co-chair

KENNETH VERCAMMEN
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500
The American Bar Association is the largest voluntary professional organization in the world with more than 400,000 members

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION - National Appointments:

General Practice Solo & Small Firm Division
-Estate Planning, Probate & Trust Committee- Chair 2008-2009, 2006-2007
-Elder Law Committee Chair 2005- present, Vice Chair 1996-1999
- Criminal Law Committee Deputy Chair 2006-present
- Tort, Personal Injury and Insurance Committee Chair 2005- 2006
-Deputy Chair and Newsletter Editor-GP Marketing Legal Services Committee 1993 -1996
- Probate & Estate Planning Committee- Newsletter Editor & Vice Chair 1997-1999, Vice Chair 2005
-Litigation Committee Member 1993 - present

BUSINESS AND AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS:
-Elder Law, Estate and Probate ABA Chicago Annual Meeting
-Elder Law and Probate New York City 2008 Annual Meeting
- Improving Your Elder Law & Estate Practice San Francisco, CA 2007
-Elder Law and Estate Planning- ABA Miami 2007
-Elder Law Practice, New Ethical Ideas to Improve Your Practice for Clients ABA Hawaii 2006
-Marketing Success Stories ABA Toronto 1998
-Opening a Business-Sayreville Adult School 1997,1996,1995
-Olympians of Marketing- ABA Annual Meeting-Orlando, Florida 1996
-Unique Marketing Techniques & Client Relations III ABA Annual Meeting-Chicago 1995
-Starting a Business-Brooklyn Bar Association 1995,1994
-Personal Marketing & Relations - 1995 Miami ABA meeting LPM Personal Marketing Skills IG
co-sponsored by four Major National Bar Sections and committees
-How to Start a Practice-1994 New Orleans ABA Annual Meeting LPM primary sponsor
-1993 New York Annual Meeting "Marketing for Small Firms"

LAW PRACTICE MANAGEMENT SECTION ABA- LPM
-Co-Chair with Jay Foonberg-ABA LPM Personal Marketing Skills Group 1998,1997,1996,1995,1994
-Speaker at many ABA Annual Meetings
-National Liaison and ex-officio member of Law Practice Management Section Council 1993 - 1995
-National Chair - Law Practice Management Committee YLD 1992-1993
-Chair and Newsletter Editor-Marketing Legal Services Committee 1996-1997,1999-2000
ABA Attendance at Leadership Conferences and participation at following Annual and Sectional meetings: Chicago 2009, New York 2008, Philadelphia GP 2007, San Francisco 2007, Washington GP 2007, Miami 2007, Hawaii 2006, Philadelphia LPM 2005; Washington DC 2002; Philadelphia 2002; London 2000, New York 2000, Atlanta 1999, Beverly Hills 1999, Cancun LPM 1998, Naples-LPM 1997; Captiva 1996, Orlando 1996, Coronado LPM 1995, Chicago 1995, Miami 1995, Washington D.C. GP 1995, Vancouver LPM 1995, New Orleans 1995, Napa, CA LPM 1994, Colorado LPM 1993, New York 1993, Boston 1993, San Francisco 1992, Cleveland GP 1992, Scottsdale AZ 1991, Los Angeles 1990, Hawaii 1989, Philadelphia 1988, Toronto 1988, New York City 1986, Washington DC 1985

KENNETH VERCAMMEN
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500
New Jersey State Bar Association- Municipal Court Section Chair 2003-2004, Vice Chair 1999-2002; Chair of Municipal Court Education Committee 1996-Present
Middlesex County Bar Association Chair Municipal Court Practice Committee 1997-2008
County Bar Board of Trustees 2000- 2006

New Jersey State Bar Association -General Practice Section-Board of Directors 1995- Present

ADJUNCT PROFESSOR Middlesex County College
Edison, NJ February, 2001-April, 2001; Jan. 1990-May, 1991
Instructor of "Criminal Law and Procedure" and Business Law. Taught college students the elements of crime and the criminal procedure system. Explained the incidents before and after trial and analyzed the impact of the Constitution on crimes and criminal procedures.

New Jersey Superior Court - Certified Mediator 1997-

New Jersey Supreme Court Committee on Municipal Courts 2000-2005

Other Speaking
-Update of Municipal Court-NJSBA Annual Meeting Atlantic City 1999,1997, 95, 94
- Cranbury Twp Municipal Alliance Against Substance Abuse 2004, 2002
-ATLA-NJ - New Jersey Courts 1991
-Intoxicated Driver Resource Center/IDRC - DUI Law 1999, 1991
-Preventing the Impaired Driver-Coalition Against Impaired Drivers 1992
-Winning Lawsuit Threshold Cases NJSBA 1992
-WCTC Radio Mid-Day Legal Advisor - Criminal and Traffic Laws 1991 and 1990
-Computers in Litigation-NJSBA Law Office Management 1994
-Self Defense Law in New Jersey - Cranbury Police Dept. 1997,1993,1992

Self Defense and Home Protection - Speaker - New Brunswick Crime Watch - 1989
-Wills and Power of Attorney 1991 Edison Democratic Association
Defending Speeding Cases - New Jersey State Bar Association/NJSBA - 1989
-Family Law & Domestic Violence Trial Practice NJ State Bar Association 1995,1994,1993
-Automobile Insurance - Middlesex County College - 1990
-Criminal & Juvenile Courts Piscataway Vo Tech – 1990
-Living Wills-Dean Witter and Nordstroms, Menlo Park Mall October 1992; Trusts and Living Wills-Dean Witter, Metro Park, June 1992; Estate Planning-North Brunswick Republican Club May 1992;

Make a Wish Foundation- Co Chair 19th Annual Summer Blast 1994 in Belmar, NJ
Co Chair Christmas Fundraiser 1993
Jersey Shore Medical Center Chair-18th Annual Summer Blast to Benefit the Jersey Shore Regional
Trauma Center at Bar Anticipation, Belmar 1993
American Red Cross Elected to Board of Directors 1988-1991

2C:33-17. Availability of alcoholic beverages to underaged, offenses

2009-10-28T08:59:00.002-07:00

2C:33-17. Availability of alcoholic beverages to underaged, offenses
1. a. Anyone who purposely or knowingly offers or serves or makes available an alcoholic beverage to a person under the legal age for consuming alcoholic beverages or entices or encourages that person to drink an alcoholic beverage is a disorderly person.

This subsection shall not apply to a parent or guardian of the person under legal age for consuming alcoholic beverages if the parent or guardian is of the legal age to consume alcoholic beverages or to a religious observance, ceremony or rite. This subsection shall also not apply to any person in his home who is of the legal age to consume alcoholic beverages who offers or serves or makes available an alcoholic beverage to a person under the legal age for consuming alcoholic beverages or entices that person to drink an alcoholic beverage in the presence of and with the permission of the parent or guardian of the person under the legal age for consuming alcoholic beverages if the parent or guardian is of the legal age to consume alcoholic beverages.

b. A person who makes real property owned, leased or managed by him available to, or leaves that property in the care of, another person with the purpose that alcoholic beverages will be made available for consumption by, or will be consumed by, persons who are under the legal age for consuming alcoholic beverages is guilty of a disorderly persons offense.

This subsection shall not apply if:

(1) the real property is licensed or required to be licensed by the Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control in accordance with the provisions of R.S.33:1-1 et seq;

(2) the person making the property available, or leaving it in the care of another person, is of the legal age to consume alcoholic beverages and is the parent or guardian of the person who consumes alcoholic beverages while under the legal age for consuming alcoholic beverages; or

(3) the alcoholic beverages are consumed by a person under the legal age for consuming alcoholic beverages during a religious observance, ceremony or rite.

2C:33-16. Alcoholic beverages; bringing or possession on school property by person of legal age; penalt

2009-10-28T08:59:00.001-07:00

2C:33-16. Alcoholic beverages; bringing or possession on school property by person of legal age; penalty
Any person of legal age to purchase alcoholic beverages, who knowingly and without the express written permission of the school board, its delegated authority, or any school principal, brings or possesses any alcoholic beverages on any property used for school purposes which is owned by any school or school board, is guilty of a disorderly persons offense.

2C:33-15 Possession, consumption of alcoholic beverages by persons under legal age; penalty.

2009-10-28T08:58:00.000-07:00

2C:33-15 Possession, consumption of alcoholic beverages by persons under legal age; penalty.

1. a. Any person under the legal age to purchase alcoholic beverages who knowingly possesses without legal authority or who knowingly consumes any alcoholic beverage in any school, public conveyance, public place, or place of public assembly, or motor vehicle, is guilty of a disorderly persons offense, and shall be fined not less than $500.00.

b.Whenever this offense is committed in a motor vehicle, the court shall, in addition to the sentence authorized for the offense, suspend or postpone for six months the driving privilege of the defendant. Upon the conviction of any person under this section, the court shall forward a report to the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission stating the first and last day of the suspension or postponement period imposed by the court pursuant to this section. If a person at the time of the imposition of a sentence is less than 17 years of age, the period of license postponement, including a suspension or postponement of the privilege of operating a motorized bicycle, shall commence on the day the sentence is imposed and shall run for a period of six months after the person reaches the age of 17 years.

If a person at the time of the imposition of a sentence has a valid driver's license issued by this State, the court shall immediately collect the license and forward it to the commission along with the report. If for any reason the license cannot be collected, the court shall include in the report the complete name, address, date of birth, eye color, and sex of the person as well as the first and last date of the license suspension period imposed by the court.

The court shall inform the person orally and in writing that if the person is convicted of operating a motor vehicle during the period of license suspension or postponement, the person shall be subject to the penalties set forth in R.S.39:3-40. A person shall be required to acknowledge receipt of the written notice in writing. Failure to receive a written notice or failure to acknowledge in writing the receipt of a written notice shall not be a defense to a subsequent charge of a violation of R.S.39:3-40.

If the person convicted under this section is not a New Jersey resident, the court shall suspend or postpone, as appropriate, the non-resident driving privilege of the person based on the age of the person and submit to the commission the required report. The court shall not collect the license of a non-resident convicted under this section. Upon receipt of a report by the court, the commission shall notify the appropriate officials in the licensing jurisdiction of the suspension or postponement.

c.In addition to the general penalty prescribed for a disorderly persons offense, the court may require any person who violates this act to participate in an alcohol education or treatment program, authorized by the Department of Health and Senior Services, for a period not to exceed the maximum period of confinement prescribed by law for the offense for which the individual has been convicted.

d.Nothing in this act shall apply to possession of alcoholic beverages by any such person while actually engaged in the performance of employment pursuant to an employment permit issued by the Director of the Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control, or for a bona fide hotel or restaurant, in accordance with the provisions of R.S.33:1-26, or while actively engaged in the preparation of food while enrolled in a culinary arts or hotel management program at a county vocational school or post secondary educational institution.

e.The provisions of section 3 of P.L.1991, c.169 (C.33:1-81.1a) shall apply to a parent, guardian or other person with legal custody of a person under 18 years of age who is found to be in violation of this section.

f.An underage person and one or two other persons shall be immune from prosecution under this section if:

(1)one of the underage persons called 9-1-1 and reported that another underage person was in need of medical assistance due to alcohol consumption;

(2)the underage person who called 9-1-1 and, if applicable, one or two other persons acting in concert with the underage person who called 9-1-1 provided each of their names to the 9-1-1 operator;

(3)the underage person was the first person to make the 9-1-1 report; and

(4)the underage person and, if applicable, one or two other persons acting in concert with the underage person who made the 9-1-1 call remained on the scene with the person under the legal age in need of medical assistance until assistance arrived and cooperated with medical assistance and law enforcement personnel on the scene.

The underage person who received medical assistance also shall be immune from prosecution under this section.

33:1-92. Penalties

2009-10-28T08:55:00.001-07:00

33:1-90. Discounts, rebates or other allowances to retailers
It shall be unlawful for any manufacturer, wholesaler, or other person privileged to sell to retailers to grant, directly or indirectly, to any retailer purchasing alcoholic beverages other than malt beverages, any discount, rebate, free goods, allowance or other inducement over and above any discount, rebate, free goods, allowance or other inducement available to any other retailer purchasing from him alcoholic beverages bearing the same brand or trade name and of like age, quality and quantity.

L.1939, c. 87, p. 175, s. 2.

33:1-91. Participation in unlawful transactions prohibited
It shall be unlawful for any manufacturer, wholesaler, retailer and for any of their stockholders, officers, directors and employees, to participate, directly or indirectly, in any transactions which are declared unlawful by the preceding paragraphs of this act.

L.1939, c. 87, p. 175, s. 3.

33:1-92. Penalties
Violation of this act shall be punished by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars ($500.00) or by imprisonment of not more than thirty (30) days or by both such fine and imprisonment in the discretion of the court.

33:1-86. Punishment for violating section 33:1-85

2009-10-28T08:53:00.000-07:00

33:1-86. Punishment for violating section 33:1-85
Any person who sells or offers for sale, or any retail licensee who sells, offers for sale or possesses alcohol in violation of this act shall be punished by a fine of not less than one hundred dollars ($100.00) and not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000.00), or by imprisonment of not less than thirty (30) days and not more than three (3) years, or by both fine and imprisonment in the discretion of the court.

33:1-81.7. Transfer of card; penalty

2009-10-28T08:52:00.003-07:00

33:1-81.7. Transfer of card; penalty
It shall be unlawful for the owner of an identification card, as defined by this act, to transfer said card to any other person for the purpose of aiding such person to secure alcoholic beverages. Any person who shall transfer such identification card for the purpose of aiding such transferee to obtain alcoholic beverages shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be sentenced to pay a fine of not more than $300.00, or undergo imprisonment for not more than 60 days. Any person not entitled thereto who shall have unlawfully procured or have issued or transferred to him, as aforesaid, identification card or any person who shall make any false statement on any card required by subsection (c) hereof to be signed by him shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be sentenced to pay a fine of not more than $300.00, or undergo imprisonment for not more than 60 days.

33:1-81.1a. Violations by parent, guardian, notification, fine

2009-10-28T08:52:00.001-07:00

33:1-81.1a. Violations by parent, guardian, notification, fine
A parent, guardian or other person having legal custody of a person under 18 years of age found in violation of R.S.33:1-81 or section 1 of P.L.1979, c.264 (C.2C:33-15) shall be notified of the violation in writing. The parent, guardian or other person having legal custody of a person under 18 years of age shall be subject to a fine in the amount of $500.00 upon any subsequent violation of R.S.33:1-81 or section 1 of P.L.1979, c.264 (C.2C:33-15) on the part of such person if it is shown that the parent, guardian or other person having legal custody failed or neglected to exercise reasonable supervision or control over the conduct of the person under 18 years of age.

33:1-81.1. Hearing; attendance by parent or guardian; subpoena

2009-10-28T08:50:00.000-07:00

33:1-81.1. Hearing; attendance by parent or guardian; subpoena
In any hearing for a violation of section 33:1-81 of the Revised Statutes the court in its discretion may require the attendance at such hearing of a parent or guardian, if there be no parent, of the minor charged with such violation if such parent or guardian is a resident of the State and may, in its discretion, compel such attendance by subpoena.

33:1-79. Licensees to purchase and sell alcoholic beverages of certain manufacturers only

2009-10-28T08:48:00.002-07:00

33:1-79. Licensees to purchase and sell alcoholic beverages of certain manufacturers only
No licensee hereunder may purchase or sell any alcoholic beverages unless the same shall have been manufactured by manufacturers licensed as such hereunder, or, if manufactured by foreign manufacturers not licensed as such hereunder, unless said foreign manufacturers shall have complied with the same standards and requirements as are or shall be prescribed by rules and regulations for manufacturers licensed as such under this chapter.

33:1-78. Bottling without license; misdemeanor

2009-10-28T08:48:00.001-07:00

33:1-78. Bottling without license; misdemeanor
Any person, except a person holding a brewery, distillery, winery or rectifier's license under this chapter, who shall bottle alcoholic beverages for sale or resale shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

33:1-77. Defenses of sellers

2009-10-28T08:47:00.000-07:00

33:1-77. Defenses of sellers
33:1-77. Anyone who sells any alcoholic beverage to a person under the legal age for purchasing alcoholic beverages is a disorderly person; provided, however, that the establishment of all of the following facts by a person making any such sale shall constitute a defense to any prosecution therefor: (a) that the purchaser falsely represented in writing, or by producing a driver's license bearing a photograph of the licensee, or by producing a photographic identification card issued pursuant to section 2 of P.L.1980, c. 47 (C.39:3-29.3), or a similar card issued pursuant to the laws of this State, another state or the federal government that he or she was of legal age to make the purchase, (b) that the appearance of the purchaser was such that an ordinary prudent person would believe him or her to be of legal age to make the purchase, and (c) that the sale was made in good faith relying upon such written representation, or production of a driver's license bearing a photograph of the licensee, or production of a photographic identification card issued pursuant to section 2 of P.L.1980, c. 47 (C.39:3-29.3), or a similar card issued pursuant to the laws of this State, another state or the federal government and appearance and in the reasonable belief that the purchaser was actually of legal age to make the purchase.

NJSA 39:4-50.14 Operation by person who has consumed alcohol who is below age to purchase alcoholic beverages (in addition to penalties under any othe

2009-10-23T09:10:00.001-07:00

NJSA 39:4-50.14 Operation by person who has consumed alcohol who is below age to purchase alcoholic beverages (in addition to penalties under any other law) Kiddie DWI

Loss of license for not less than 30 days nor more than 90 days and perform community service for not less than 15 days nor more than 30 days. In addition, must satisfy program and fee requirements of the IDRC or participate in a program of alcohol education and highway safety. Penalties shall be in addition to the penalties which the court may impose under N.J.S.A. 2C:33-15, N.J.S.A. 33-1:81, N.J.S.A. 39:4-50, or any other law. For information regarding points or surcharges contact the Motor Vehicle Commission. For information about car insurance eligibility and points contact your car insurance company or the New Jersey Department of Insurance.

1. Any person under the legal age to purchase alcoholic beverages who operates a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.01% or more, but less than 0.08%, by weight of alcohol in his blood, shall forfeit his right to operate a motor vehicle over the highways of this State or shall be prohibited from obtaining a license to operate a motor vehicle in this State for a period of not less than 30 or more than 90 days beginning on the date he becomes eligible to obtain a license or on the day of conviction, whichever is later, and shall perform community service for a period of not less than 15 or more than 30 days.

In addition, the person shall satisfy the program and fee requirements of an Intoxicated Driver Resource Center or participate in a program of alcohol education and highway safety as prescribed by the chief administrator.

The penalties provided under the provisions of this section shall be in addition to the penalties which the court may impose under N.J.S.2C:33-15, R.S.33:1-81, R.S.39:4-50 or any other law.

NJSA 2A:4A-20. Short title This act shall be known and may be cited as the "New Jersey Code of Juvenile Justice."

2009-10-20T14:51:00.000-07:00

NJSA 2A:4A-20. Short title This act shall be known and may be cited as the "New Jersey Code of Juvenile Justice."

Passenger Pat down during traffic stop permitted if belief gang member is armed and dangerous Arizona v Johnson 172 L. Ed. 2d 694 (2009)

2009-07-05T05:08:00.001-07:00

Passenger Pat down during traffic stop permitted if belief gang member is armed and dangerous Arizona v Johnson 172 L. Ed. 2d 694 (2009)
While patrolling near a Tucson neighborhood associated with the Crips gang, police officers serving on Arizona’s gang task force stopped an automobile for a vehicular infraction warranting a citation. At the time of the stop, the officers had no reason to suspect the car’s occupants of criminal activity. Officer Trevizo attended to respondent Johnson, the back-seat passenger, whose behavior and clothing caused Trevizo to question him. After learning that Johnson was from a town with a Crips gang and had been in prison, Trevizo asked him get out of the car in order to question him further, out of the hearing of the front-seat passenger, about his gang affiliation. Because she suspected that he was armed, she patted him down for safety when he exited the car. During the patdown, she felt the butt of a gun. At that point, Johnson began to struggle, and Trevizo handcuffed him. Johnson was charged with, inter alia, possession of a weapon by a prohibited possessor
Held: Officer Trevizo’s patdown of Johnson did not violate the Fourth Amendment ’s prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures.

Arrest and Search by police based invalid arrest warrant does not suppress drugs & gun found Herring v United States 129 S. Ct. 695 (2009)

2009-07-05T05:07:00.000-07:00

Arrest and Search by police based invalid arrest warrant does not suppress drugs & gun found
Herring v United States 129 S. Ct. 695 (2009)
When police mistakes leading to an unlawful search are the result of isolated negligence attenuated from the search, rather than systemic error or reckless disregard of constitutional requirements, the exclusionary rule does not apply.

Police can now question defendant even if counsel assigne

2009-07-05T05:01:00.002-07:00

Police can now question defendant even if counsel assigned. Michigan v. Jackson is overruled, which had forbid police from initiating interrogation of a criminal defendant who has invoked his right to counsel at arraignment. Montejo v Jackson __ S. Ct. ____ Decided May 26, 2009 Docket No. 07–1529

The admission of the Drug lab certificates violated petitioner’s Sixth Amendment right to confront the witnesses against him MELENDEZ-DIAZ v. MASS

2009-07-05T05:01:00.001-07:00

The admission of the Drug lab certificates violated petitioner’s Sixth Amendment right to confront the witnesses against him MELENDEZ-DIAZ v. MASSACHUSETTS __ S. Ct. ____

No. 07–591. Decided June 25, 2009

At petitioner’s state-court drug trial, the prosecution introduced certificates of state laboratory analysts stating that material seized by police and connected to petitioner was cocaine of a certain quantity. As required by Massachusetts law, the certificates were sworn to before a notary public and were submitted as prima facie evidence of what they asserted. Petitioner objected, asserting that Crawford v. Washington, 541 U. S. 36 , required the analysts to testify in person. The trial court disagreed, the certificates were admitted, and petitioner was convicted. The Massachusetts Appeals Court affirmed, rejecting petitioner’s claim that the certificates’ admission violated the Sixth Amendment .
Held: The admission of the Drug lab certificates violated petitioner’s Sixth Amendment right to confront the witnesses against him.
(a) Under Crawford, a witness’s testimony against a defendant is inadmissible unless the witness appears at trial or, if the witness is unavailable, the defendant had a prior opportunity for cross-examination. 541 U. S., at 54. The certificates here are affidavits, which fall within the “core class of testimonial statements” covered by the Confrontation Clause, id., at 51. They asserted that the substance found in petitioner’s possession was, as the prosecution claimed, cocaine of a certain weight—the precise testimony the analysts would be expected to provide if called at trial. Not only were the certificates made, as Crawford required for testimonial statements, “under circumstances which would lead an objective witness reasonably to believe that the statement would be available for use at a later trial,” id., at 52, but under the relevant Massachusetts law their sole purpose was to provide prima facie evidence of the substance’s composition, quality, and net weight. Petitioner was entitled to “be confronted with” the persons giving this testimony at trial. Id., at 54.
(b) The arguments advanced to avoid this rather straightforward application of Crawford are rejected. Respondent’s claim that the analysts are not subject to confrontation because they are not “accusatory” witnesses finds no support in the Sixth Amendment ’s text or in this Court’s case law. The affiants’ testimonial statements were not “nearly contemporaneous” with their observations, nor, if they had been, would that fact alter the statements’ testimonial character. There is no support for the proposition that witnesses who testify regarding facts other than those observed at the crime scene are exempt from confrontation. The absence of interrogation is irrelevant; a witness who volunteers his testimony is no less a witness for Sixth Amendment purposes. The affidavits do not qualify as traditional official or business records. The argument that the analysts should not be subject to confrontation because their statements result from neutral scientific testing is little more than an invitation to return to the since-overruled decision in Ohio v. Roberts, 448 U. S. 56 , which held that evidence with “particularized guarantees of trustworthiness” was admissible without confrontation. Petitioner’s power to subpoena the analysts is no substitute for the right of confrontation. Finally, the requirements of the Confrontation Clause may not be relaxed because they make the prosecution’s task burdensome. In any event, the practice in many States already accords with today’s decision, and the serious disruption predicted by respondent and the dissent has not materialized

Police cannot search car passenger compartment if occupant already arrested. Arizona v. Gant 129 S. Ct. 1710 (2009)

2009-07-05T04:57:00.001-07:00

Police cannot search car passenger compartment if occupant already arrested. Arizona v. Gant 129 S. Ct. 1710 (2009)

Police may search the passenger compartment of a vehicle incident to a recent occupant's arrest only if it is reasonable to believe that an arrestee might access the vehicle at the time of the search or that the vehicle contains evidence of the offense of arrest. The Arizona Supreme Court's reversal of Defendant's drug conviction is affirmed.

Hot Topics in Municipal Court Practice- Forms available

2008-05-22T07:25:00.001-07:00

NJSBA Annual Meeting
Trump Taj Mahal Casino Resort

Hot Topics in Municipal Court Practice
Thursday, May 22 2008  
8am - 9:30 am Diamond A
An overview of the top 25 municipal court cases of the year and interactive discussion of the most current topics in municipal court.
Speakers:  Paris P. Eliades, Esq.  Daggett Kraemer Eliades Kovach & Ursin, Sparta
Kenneth A. Vercammen, Esq. 
Kenneth Vercammen & Associates,
Edison
Past Chair Municipal Court Section
2005 NJSBA Municipal Court Attorney
of the Year
Editor- NJ Municipal Court Law Review

CD with forms and Materials
provided to all attendees!
02 Lt of rep only.doc
02 DISC.doc
02a DISC to DMV.doc
02d Disc_Complainant.doc
03D Retainer-MUN COURT.doc
04 Hearing notice.doc
100 Cross Exam Q-DWI.doc
AG Guidelines binding.doc
Appeal Fee Bill to Client.doc
atty_guidelines_0505.pdf
Bail reduce Mt.doc
Brief post convict vacate plea.doc
Conditional Discharge Pet Cl.doc
constructive poss.doc
Court cannot handle discovery.doc
Crim interview aba.doc
crim- Specific defenses.doc
Defense Affidavit to Client.doc
DISC to Client from Prosecutor.doc
DUI Motions non disc- jury.doc
DWI- Blood defense brief.doc
DWI- expert letter.doc
DWS Fine reduced parking ticket.doc
Expungement recommend.doc
MIRANDA br.doc
More disc br.doc
Mt for Civil Reservation.doc
Mt forSlap.doc
Mt to be Relieved.doc
Mt- Dismiss No disc mun Pros.doc
Mun Ct Interview.doc
MVC_ DMV - Follow-up Hearing.doc
MVC_ DMV points for Atom.doc
No discovery dismiss Brief.doc
No Show in Court.doc
OBJ TO LAB CERT.doc
OPRA Brief Crim.doc
Order mark try or dismiss.doc
Order to be Relieved.doc
Pros- missing abstract.doc
Refusal Brief wrong statement.doc
Storm Cert priv pros.doc
Sup-Miranda.doc
SUPPRESSION MT.doc
SUPPRESSION BRIEF.doc
Chun discovery brief
www.BeNotGuilty.com

Can’t attend? Need forms?
Send email to Kenvnjlaws@verizon.net and the materials will be sent to you within 2 days, or fax us your email address 732-572-0030 fax

Name ___________________

Email ___________________

2A:158-9. Temporary prosecutors; appointment by court; powers; compensation

2008-01-08T07:24:00.000-08:00

2A:158-9. Temporary prosecutors; appointment by court; powers; compensation
2A:158-9. In the absence of the attorney general and of the county prosecutor, at any session of the Superior Court, the Assignment Judge of the Superior Court may appoint a fit person to prosecute the pleas of the State during that session. The person so appointed, on taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by N.J.S.2A:158-3, shall be vested, during such session, with the powers of a prosecutor, and be entitled to the same compensation and subject to the same penalties.

Criminal and Motor vehicle violations can cost you. You will have to pay fines in court or receive points on your drivers license. If convicted of a criminal offense you could face Jail Time and loss of Job. An accumulation of too many points, or certain moving violations may require you to pay expensive surcharges to the N.J. MVC [Division of Motor Vehicles] or have your license suspended. Don't give up! The Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen can provide experienced attorney representation for criminal and serious motor vehicle violations.

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500 (Phone)
732-572-0030 (Fax)

2A:158-8. Expenses of prosecutors in enjoining nuisances under federal law

2008-01-08T07:23:00.000-08:00

2A:158-8. Expenses of prosecutors in enjoining nuisances under federal law
2A:158-8. Whenever the prosecutor of any county shall bring an action, as authorized by the laws of the United States, to enjoin a nuisance as defined by the laws of the United States, all necessary expenses incurred thereby, certified to and approved under his hand by a judge of the Superior Court shall be paid by the county treasurer whenever the same shall be approved by the board of chosen freeholders of such county.

Criminal and Motor vehicle violations can cost you. You will have to pay fines in court or receive points on your drivers license. If convicted of a criminal offense you could face Jail Time and loss of Job. An accumulation of too many points, or certain moving violations may require you to pay expensive surcharges to the N.J. MVC [Division of Motor Vehicles] or have your license suspended. Don't give up! The Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen can provide experienced attorney representation for criminal and serious motor vehicle violations.

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500 (Phone)
732-572-0030 (Fax)

2A:158-7. Expenses of prosecutors in enforcement of laws

2008-01-04T10:55:00.000-08:00

2A:158-7. Expenses of prosecutors in enforcement of laws
2A:158-7. All necessary expenses incurred by the prosecutor for each county in the detection, arrest, indictment and conviction of offenders against the laws shall, upon being certified to by the prosecutor and approved, under his hand, by a judge of the Superior Court, be paid by the county treasurer whenever the same shall be approved by the board of chosen freeholders of such county. The amount or amounts to be expended shall not exceed the amount fixed by the board of chosen freeholders in its regular or emergency appropriation, unless such expenditure is specifically authorized by order of the assignment judge of the Superior Court for such county.

Criminal and Motor vehicle violations can cost you. You will have to pay fines in court or receive points on your drivers license. If convicted of a criminal offense you could face Jail Time and loss of Job. An accumulation of too many points, or certain moving violations may require you to pay expensive surcharges to the N.J. MVC [Division of Motor Vehicles] or have your license suspended. Don't give up! The Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen can provide experienced attorney representation for criminal and serious motor vehicle violations.

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500 (Phone)
732-572-0030 (Fax)

2A:158-6. Fees of prosecutors

2008-01-04T10:53:00.000-08:00

2A:158-6. Fees of prosecutors
The same fees shall be payable for the services of prosecutors as are by law made payable for similar services of the attorney general.

Criminal and Motor vehicle violations can cost you. You will have to pay fines in court or receive points on your drivers license. If convicted of a criminal offense you could face Jail Time and loss of Job. An accumulation of too many points, or certain moving violations may require you to pay expensive surcharges to the N.J. MVC [Division of Motor Vehicles] or have your license suspended. Don't give up! The Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen can provide experienced attorney representation for criminal and serious motor vehicle violations.

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500 (Phone)
732-572-0030 (Fax)

2A:158-5. Powers, duties and liabilities of prosecutors

2008-01-04T10:52:00.000-08:00

2A:158-5. Powers, duties and liabilities of prosecutors
Each prosecutor shall be vested with the same powers and be subject to the same penalties, within his county, as the attorney general shall by law be vested with or subject to, and he shall use all reasonable and lawful diligence for the detection, arrest, indictment and conviction of offenders against the laws.

Criminal and Motor vehicle violations can cost you. You will have to pay fines in court or receive points on your drivers license. If convicted of a criminal offense you could face Jail Time and loss of Job. An accumulation of too many points, or certain moving violations may require you to pay expensive surcharges to the N.J. MVC [Division of Motor Vehicles] or have your license suspended. Don't give up! The Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen can provide experienced attorney representation for criminal and serious motor vehicle violations.

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500 (Phone)
732-572-0030 (Fax)

2A:158-4. Exclusive jurisdiction of prosecutors over criminal business; exceptions

2008-01-04T10:50:00.000-08:00

2A:158-4. Exclusive jurisdiction of prosecutors over criminal business; exceptions
The criminal business of the State shall be prosecuted by the Attorney General and the county prosecutors.

Criminal and Motor vehicle violations can cost you. You will have to pay fines in court or receive points on your drivers license. If convicted of a criminal offense you could face Jail Time and loss of Job. An accumulation of too many points, or certain moving violations may require you to pay expensive surcharges to the N.J. MVC [Division of Motor Vehicles] or have your license suspended. Don't give up! The Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen can provide experienced attorney representation for criminal and serious motor vehicle violations.

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500 (Phone)
732-572-0030 (Fax)

2A:158-3. Oath of prosecutors

2008-01-04T10:49:00.000-08:00

2A:158-3. Oath of prosecutors
2A:158-3. Every person appointed county prosecutor shall, before entering upon the duties of his office, take and subscribe before the clerk of the county for which he has been appointed, or before a judge of the Superior Court, the following oath:

"I, .................. , do solemnly promise and swear (or affirm), that I will faithfully, justly and impartially execute the duties of county prosecutor of this State, in and for the county of .................... , to the best of my abilities and understanding. So help me God."

Criminal and Motor vehicle violations can cost you. You will have to pay fines in court or receive points on your drivers license. If convicted of a criminal offense you could face Jail Time and loss of Job. An accumulation of too many points, or certain moving violations may require you to pay expensive surcharges to the N.J. MVC [Division of Motor Vehicles] or have your license suspended. Don't give up! The Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen can provide experienced attorney representation for criminal and serious motor vehicle violations.

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500 (Phone)
732-572-0030 (Fax)

2A:158-2. County prosecutor substituted for prosecutor of the pleas

2008-01-04T10:47:00.000-08:00

2A:158-2. County prosecutor substituted for prosecutor of the pleas
In any statute in which the designation "prosecutor of the pleas" is used, it shall be construed to mean the county prosecutor. Until the term of any existing prosecutor of the pleas shall expire and a county prosecutor be appointed to succeed him as provided in this article, such prosecutor of the pleas shall have all of the powers, perform all of the duties and be entitled to the compensation of a county prosecutor for such county.

Criminal and Motor vehicle violations can cost you. You will have to pay fines in court or receive points on your drivers license. If convicted of a criminal offense you could face Jail Time and loss of Job. An accumulation of too many points, or certain moving violations may require you to pay expensive surcharges to the N.J. MVC [Division of Motor Vehicles] or have your license suspended. Don't give up! The Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen can provide experienced attorney representation for criminal and serious motor vehicle violations.

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500 (Phone)
732-572-0030 (Fax)

2A:158-1.1. Other gainful employment by prosecutor; prohibition; exception

2008-01-04T10:45:00.000-08:00

2A:158-1.1. Other gainful employment by prosecutor; prohibition; exception
Any person appointed to the office of county prosecutor shall devote his entire time to the duties of his office and shall not engage in the practice of law or other gainful employment, except those appointed to that office in counties of the third class having a population between 65,000 and 85,000. No exception to the requirement that a prosecutor serve on a full-time basis shall be permitted on or after April 14, 1986.

Criminal and Motor vehicle violations can cost you. You will have to pay fines in court or receive points on your drivers license. If convicted of a criminal offense you could face Jail Time and loss of Job. An accumulation of too many points, or certain moving violations may require you to pay expensive surcharges to the N.J. MVC [Division of Motor Vehicles] or have your license suspended. Don't give up! The Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen can provide experienced attorney representation for criminal and serious motor vehicle violations.

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500 (Phone)
732-572-0030 (Fax)

2A:158-1. Appointment of county prosecutor; general duties

2008-01-04T10:38:00.000-08:00

2A:158-1. Appointment of county prosecutor; general duties
There shall be appointed, for each county, by the governor with the advice and consent of the senate to serve for a term of 5 years and until the appointment and qualification of his successor, some fit person who shall have been admitted to the practice of law in this state for at least 5 years, who shall be known as the county prosecutor and who, except as otherwise provided by law, shall prosecute the pleas of the state in such county and shall have all of the powers and perform all of the duties formerly had and performed by the prosecutor of the pleas of such county. As the term of the prosecutor of the pleas of any county shall expire there shall be appointed in his place and stead such county prosecutor.

Criminal and Motor vehicle violations can cost you. You will have to pay fines in court or receive points on your drivers license. If convicted of a criminal offense you could face Jail Time and loss of Job. An accumulation of too many points, or certain moving violations may require you to pay expensive surcharges to the N.J. MVC [Division of Motor Vehicles] or have your license suspended. Don't give up! The Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen can provide experienced attorney representation for criminal and serious motor vehicle violations.

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500 (Phone)
732-572-0030 (Fax)

2A:157-23. Construction; "special officer" discontinued

2008-01-04T10:37:00.000-08:00

2A:157-23. Construction; "special officer" discontinued
It is the intention that this chapter be so construed as to make consistent throughout the state the law as it applies to the office or position of county detective and county investigator, to provide that county detectives shall be in the classified service of the civil service, and county investigators in the unclassified service and to discontinue the term "special officer" as the title of any office in the offices of prosecutors.

Criminal and Motor vehicle violations can cost you. You will have to pay fines in court or receive points on your drivers license. If convicted of a criminal offense you could face Jail Time and loss of Job. An accumulation of too many points, or certain moving violations may require you to pay expensive surcharges to the N.J. MVC [Division of Motor Vehicles] or have your license suspended. Don't give up! The Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen can provide experienced attorney representation for criminal and serious motor vehicle violations.

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500 (Phone)
732-572-0030 (Fax)

2A:157-22. Limitation on number

2008-01-04T10:35:00.000-08:00

2A:157-22. Limitation on number
In any county in which the total number of county detectives and county investigators authorized by this chapter exceeds the total number of officers employed in the prosecutor's office of such county for the detection, apprehension, arrest, indictment and conviction of offenders against the law, as of the effective date of this chapter, no new appointments as county detective or county investigator shall be made, other than to fill vacancies hereafter occurring, without prior approval as to the number and salary thereof by the board of chosen freeholders or, in counties of the first class having a population of less than eight hundred thousand inhabitants, by order of the Superior Court Assignment Judge of the county.

Criminal and Motor vehicle violations can cost you. You will have to pay fines in court or receive points on your drivers license. If convicted of a criminal offense you could face Jail Time and loss of Job. An accumulation of too many points, or certain moving violations may require you to pay expensive surcharges to the N.J. MVC [Division of Motor Vehicles] or have your license suspended. Don't give up! The Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen can provide experienced attorney representation for criminal and serious motor vehicle violations.

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500 (Phone)
732-572-0030 (Fax)

2A:157-21. Saving clause

2008-01-04T10:33:00.000-08:00

2A:157-21. Saving clause
Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, nothing herein shall be construed to require an increase in any salaries heretofore paid or to be paid in any county, unless and until the salary schedules herein provided shall be adopted by resolution of the county board of chosen freeholders. Nothing in this chapter provided shall be construed to reduce the amount of salary now being paid to any person, to affect the pension rights of any person, to effect the transfer of the holder of any office or position from the classified to the unclassified service of the civil service, or to terminate tenure rights vested, by the provisions of any law repealed by this chapter, in any person continued in office or position in the unclassified service.

Criminal and Motor vehicle violations can cost you. You will have to pay fines in court or receive points on your drivers license. If convicted of a criminal offense you could face Jail Time and loss of Job. An accumulation of too many points, or certain moving violations may require you to pay expensive surcharges to the N.J. MVC [Division of Motor Vehicles] or have your license suspended. Don't give up! The Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen can provide experienced attorney representation for criminal and serious motor vehicle violations.

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500 (Phone)
732-572-0030 (Fax)

2A:157-20. County detectives and special officers; status

2008-01-04T10:31:00.000-08:00

2A:157-20. County detectives and special officers; status
L.1951, c. 274, p. 946, section 20 of an act entitled "An Act to revise the law concerning county detectives and county investigators, and repealing sundry acts." (C. 2:181-51) saved from repeal.

Criminal and Motor vehicle violations can cost you. You will have to pay fines in court or receive points on your drivers license. If convicted of a criminal offense you could face Jail Time and loss of Job. An accumulation of too many points, or certain moving violations may require you to pay expensive surcharges to the N.J. MVC [Division of Motor Vehicles] or have your license suspended. Don't give up! The Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen can provide experienced attorney representation for criminal and serious motor vehicle violations.

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500 (Phone)
732-572-0030 (Fax)

2A:157-19. Power of prosecutor to incur expenses

2008-01-04T10:26:00.000-08:00

2A:157-19. Power of prosecutor to incur expenses
Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to limit the power of any prosecutor, duly conferred upon him by law, to incur expenses in the detection, arrest, indictment and conviction of offenders against the criminal laws of this state.

Criminal and Motor vehicle violations can cost you. You will have to pay fines in court or receive points on your drivers license. If convicted of a criminal offense you could face Jail Time and loss of Job. An accumulation of too many points, or certain moving violations may require you to pay expensive surcharges to the N.J. MVC [Division of Motor Vehicles] or have your license suspended. Don't give up! The Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen can provide experienced attorney representation for criminal and serious motor vehicle violations.

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500 (Phone)
732-572-0030 (Fax)

2A:157-18. Payment of salaries; fixing salaries over minimum

2008-01-04T10:24:00.000-08:00

2A:157-18. Payment of salaries; fixing salaries over minimum
Annual salaries of county detectives and county investigators shall be paid by the county treasurer upon the certification of the prosecutor out of funds of the county, in the same manner as other salaries are paid, and shall be not less than the minimum amounts in this act fixed. The prosecutor may, with the approval of the board of chosen freeholders, fix the salaries of county detectives and county investigators at amounts in excess of the minimum amounts in this chapter provided.

Criminal and Motor vehicle violations can cost you. You will have to pay fines in court or receive points on your drivers license. If convicted of a criminal offense you could face Jail Time and loss of Job. An accumulation of too many points, or certain moving violations may require you to pay expensive surcharges to the N.J. MVC [Division of Motor Vehicles] or have your license suspended. Don't give up! The Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen can provide experienced attorney representation for criminal and serious motor vehicle violations.

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500 (Phone)
732-572-0030 (Fax)

2A:157-17. Service of process; fees

2008-01-04T10:23:00.000-08:00

2A:157-17. Service of process; fees
County detectives and county investigators may serve or execute for the sheriff any process or writ in any criminal proceeding and make return thereof. For every process or writ so served or executed by a county detective or county investigator, the sheriff shall be entitled to collect and receive the same fees, and to tax such fees in the bills of costs, as if the process or writ had been served by him.

Criminal and Motor vehicle violations can cost you. You will have to pay fines in court or receive points on your drivers license. If convicted of a criminal offense you could face Jail Time and loss of Job. An accumulation of too many points, or certain moving violations may require you to pay expensive surcharges to the N.J. MVC [Division of Motor Vehicles] or have your license suspended. Don't give up! The Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen can provide experienced attorney representation for criminal and serious motor vehicle violations.

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500 (Phone)
732-572-0030 (Fax)

2A:157-16. County investigators in sixth-class counties

2008-01-04T10:21:00.000-08:00

2A:157-16. County investigators in sixth-class counties
In counties of the sixth class there may be appointed not in excess of six county investigators, who shall be paid annual salaries of not less than $5,000.00.

Criminal and Motor vehicle violations can cost you. You will have to pay fines in court or receive points on your drivers license. If convicted of a criminal offense you could face Jail Time and loss of Job. An accumulation of too many points, or certain moving violations may require you to pay expensive surcharges to the N.J. MVC [Division of Motor Vehicles] or have your license suspended. Don't give up! The Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen can provide experienced attorney representation for criminal and serious motor vehicle violations.

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500 (Phone)
732-572-0030 (Fax)

2A:157-15. County investigators in counties of fifth class; compensation

2008-01-04T10:20:00.000-08:00

2A:157-15. County investigators in counties of fifth class; compensation
In counties of the fifth class there may be appointed not in excess of 12 county investigators, who shall be paid annual salaries of not less than $5,500.00.

Criminal and Motor vehicle violations can cost you. You will have to pay fines in court or receive points on your drivers license. If convicted of a criminal offense you could face Jail Time and loss of Job. An accumulation of too many points, or certain moving violations may require you to pay expensive surcharges to the N.J. MVC [Division of Motor Vehicles] or have your license suspended. Don't give up! The Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen can provide experienced attorney representation for criminal and serious motor vehicle violations.

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500 (Phone)
732-572-0030 (Fax)

2A:157-13. County investigators in third-class counties

2008-01-04T10:19:00.000-08:00

2A:157-13. County investigators in third-class counties
In counties of the third class there may be appointed not in excess of 2 county investigators who shall be paid annual salaries of not less than $5,500.00.

Criminal and Motor vehicle violations can cost you. You will have to pay fines in court or receive points on your drivers license. If convicted of a criminal offense you could face Jail Time and loss of Job. An accumulation of too many points, or certain moving violations may require you to pay expensive surcharges to the N.J. MVC [Division of Motor Vehicles] or have your license suspended. Don't give up! The Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen can provide experienced attorney representation for criminal and serious motor vehicle violations.

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500 (Phone)
732-572-0030 (Fax)

2A:157-12. County investigators in second-class counties

2008-01-04T10:17:00.000-08:00

2A:157-12. County investigators in second-class counties
In counties of the second class there may be appointed not in excess of 9 county investigators, who shall be paid annual salaries of not less than $6,500.00.

Not more than 6 county investigators in counties of the second class with populations of 400,000 inhabitants or less, and not more than 21 county investigators in counties of the second class with populations in excess of 400,000 inhabitants, in addition to those provided for in this section may be appointed by the county prosecutor where there appears to be a reasonable necessity therefor, if approved by resolution of the board of chosen freeholders of the county.

Criminal and Motor vehicle violations can cost you. You will have to pay fines in court or receive points on your drivers license. If convicted of a criminal offense you could face Jail Time and loss of Job. An accumulation of too many points, or certain moving violations may require you to pay expensive surcharges to the N.J. MVC [Division of Motor Vehicles] or have your license suspended. Don't give up! The Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen can provide experienced attorney representation for criminal and serious motor vehicle violations.

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500 (Phone)
732-72-0030 (Fax)

2A:157-11. County investigators in first-class counties

2008-01-04T10:15:00.000-08:00

2A:157-11. County investigators in first-class counties
In counties of the first class there may be appointed not in excess of 30 county investigators, who shall be paid annual salaries of not less than $6,500.00.

Criminal and Motor vehicle violations can cost you. You will have to pay fines in court or receive points on your drivers license. If convicted of a criminal offense you could face Jail Time and loss of Job. An accumulation of too many points, or certain moving violations may require you to pay expensive surcharges to the N.J. MVC [Division of Motor Vehicles] or have your license suspended. Don't give up! The Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen can provide experienced attorney representation for criminal and serious motor vehicle violations.

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500 (Phone)
732-572-0030 (Fax)

Program Agenda:
5:00		Opening
5:35		Initial client interview; getting retained; dealing with the prosecutor – Kenneth A. Vercammen, Esq
6:05		Driving While Suspended – Stephen D. Williams, Esq.
6:35		Drug Cases and DREs – Norma M. Murgado, Esq.
7:05		Break
7:15		Assault and miscellaneous proceedings – John E. Hogan, Esq.
7:45		DWI/Blood – John Menzel, Esq.
8:15		Alcotest – John Menzel, Esq.; Norma M. Murgado, Esq.
8:45		Q&A and closing comments
9:00		Adjourn