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
Fred is a good lawyer, he is really young yet made me feel confident that my lawful rights were being protected, and investigated all avenues when there was potential they weren't. He is very knowledgeable, and offered great peace of mind in such a distressing situation. I always felt like he had my back throughout the whole process, supporting aspects to my case that didn't even fall within his scope. I would highly recommend Fred.
Amy L
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Using Fredrick Sisto for my attorney was a great experience. He was very easy to understand and work with. Also very good at his job and hard working. I would recommend to anyone who is seeking an attorney!
Thomas L
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Very informative.
Patrick S
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
Thanks for sharing this information.
Joe F
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
I was very pleased with my representation by Fred Sisto. He is very honest and explained everything to me in detail. I would recommend him to anybody who is seeking legal representation..
Jeff M
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Mr. Fred Sisto handled a case regarding my business. He was always available to answer my calls directly and helped me with any questions I had. He also had the case dismissed before I was even able to make it to the court room! I know it can be difficult when finding an attorney but I know I made no mistake choosing the law offices of Frederick Sisto, I highly recommend him!!
Kari J
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred, Thank you for the notifications on the DUI stops.
Joe F
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Great!!! , got my case handled in the exact manner that I was told and would recommend to everyone else in need of legal representation .
Raumelis R
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred's services has been more than exceptional. He provided updates on my case. He got me one of the best outcomes i could have asked for, and has represented me twice with amazing results. Fred can work his magic on your case just as he did for me
Chris K