Bail Reform: Discoverable Documentations

by | Feb 1, 2017 | Blog, Criminal Law, Law Reform and Amendments

Fred Sisto Brick Lawyer“In cases not otherwise covered under Section 7.3, unless the presumption of seeking pretrial detention is overcome pursuant to subsection 7.4.6, the prosecutor shall apply for pretrial  detention  if the present offense is a crime of the first or second degree, and the defendant committed the present offense:

(a)    while on pretrial release for an indictable crime or a disorderly persons offense involving domestic violence as defined in N.J.S.A.2C:25-19(a), whether that previous offense had been charged by complaint-warrant or complaint-summons , or

(b)    while on probation, special probation, intensive supervision program (ISP),parole, or was on pretrial intervention (PTI) where the defendant had pleaded guilty as required by N.J.S.A. 2C:43- 12(g)(3) (see P.L. 2015, c. 98), or if the defendant was on release pending sentencing or appeal.  See note 18.

In cases not otherwise covered under Section 7.3, unless the presumption of seeking pretrial detention is overcome pursuant to subsection 7.4.6, the prosecutor  shall apply for pretrial detention  if the automated  pretrial risk assessment raises a New Violent Criminal Activity  (NVCA)   flag.

In any case where there is a rebuttable presumption of seeking pretrial detention pursuant to subsection 7.4.1, 7.4.2, 7.4.3, 7.4.4, or 7.4.5, the prosecutor shall file a motion for pretrial detention unless a supervisory prosecutor designated pursuant to Section 7.8 determines that: (1) the risks posed by defendant’s release can be controlled adequately by imposing release conditions monitored by the pretrial services program, or (2) the interests of justice would not be served by applying for pretrial detention. If the determination is made to overcome the presumption of applying for pretrial detention, the supervisory prosecutor shall document the reason(s) for that decision in the case file.

All motions for pretrial detention shall be filed electronically through the eCourts system. When the prosecutor files a motion for pretrial detention, the prosecutor shall specify whether the application is based on the risk that (1) defendant will not appear in court when required;  (2) defendant will endanger the safety of any other person or the community; ( 3) defendant will obstruct or attempt to obstruct the criminal justice process, or threaten, injure, or intimidate, or attempt to threaten, injure, or intimidate, a prospective witness or juror; or (4) any combination of the foregoing specified  risks. This specification may limit the type of evidence or information that would be relevant to the pretrial detention decision, and thus limit the scope of the detention hearing.”

One favorable provision contained within this Directive is that the prosecutor’s reasons “shall be documented in the case file.” This proviso lends itself to the argument that such documentations should be discoverable in determining whether a bail decision constitutes an abuse of discretion.

Excellent rating
Based on 288 reviews
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
2 👍🏻👍🏻 up
Cc
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Helped with my issues timely manner and continued constant communication to make sure I was aware of any changes or issues that arose.
Whick 3
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred Sisto is an excellent attorney who works diligently and thoroughly to support, advise, and guide you through your legal difficulties. He is down-to-earth, advises you well, and his cost is comparable and well-worth it based on the service and expertise that he provides. Fred was able to get me the best possible outcome for my situation based on the possibilities and he was direct and honest with me throughout the process. John McDonnell
John M
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Very good Lawyer , easy to work with . Gets results !
William C
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Mr. Sisto is very knowledgeable in the specific area of which he practices. I was beyond thankful for the end results of which could not have been achieved without Mr. Sisto's intervention.
Shawn H
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred is the absolute BEST out there!! My experience with him was great he walked me thru everything and got my charges dropped!!!!!
Kat M
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred is an excellent attorney. Even though we did not initiate the official pleading process, he deep dived into researching and sorted out my questions without any consultation fee. I highly recommend him!
Qianru Z
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred will fight for you all the way.
Peter
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Very helpful services provided, updates make people think...
Atlantic A
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
He is a very educated human being let alone a fantastic lawyer i HIGHLY HIGHLY recommend him .. knowledgable to the point and always on the money !!
Lukas A