Returning to sentencing downgrades under the broader “in the interests of justice standard”, the defendant must provide compelling reasons for the downgrade in addition to, and separate from, the mitigating factors which substantially outweigh the aggravating factors. State v. Megargel, 143 N.J. 484, 496-502 (1996). The focus is not on the offender, but on the […]
Sentencing Downgrade (Part 3) – State v. E.R.
In State v. E.R., 273 N.J . Super. 262 (App. Div. 1994), an amended judgment of conviction was imposed upon defendant, E.R., for two second degree crimes. Id. at 264. By the terms of the amended judgment, the trial court’s seven year prison sentence was vacated and the defendant was re-sentenced to probation for a […]
Sentencing Downgrade (Part 2) – Mentally Handicapped
Additionally, the two statutes address two qualitatively different criminal law situations. Id. 2C :44-l(d) governs imprisonment versus non-imprisonment, a more serious condition, while section 2C :44-lf(2) governs whether or not a defendant convicted of a crime should be sentenced as if convicted of a crime one degree lower. Id. This means that a first or […]
Sentencing Downgrade (Part 1) – Serious Injustice
Although our legislature mandates that persons convicted of first or second-degree crimes must be sentenced to prison, as opposed to probation, there are limited circumstances where defendant can still receive a sentencing downgrade to probation for a first or second-degree crime. Note that probation as used here refers to “standard probation” as opposed to drug […]
Criminal Law – The Sentencing Process (Part 4)
A court may consider other matters that it finds mitigating even if not listed in the statute. State v. Rice, 425 N.J. Super. 375, 381 (App. Div. 2012). In addition to the enumerated mitigating factors, restrictions on the defendant that will not serve to offset the time that she will be incarcerated should be considered […]
Criminal Law – The Sentencing Process (Part 3)
As opposed to the aggravating factors that weigh in favor of a longer and/or more severe sentence, the mitigating factors weigh in favor of a shorter and/or less severe sentence. Aside from arguing the applicability of mitigating factors, the defense should incorporate the authority above to argue against applying the aggravating factors. Mitigating factor (1) […]
Criminal Law – The Sentencing Process (Part 2)
Returning to the required balancing of the aggravating and mitigating factors in formulating a sentence, the State has the burden to prove the existence of any aggravating factors. State v . Merlino, 208 N.J . Super. 24, 261-62 (Law Div. 1984). The burden of proof is by clear and convincing evidence. Aggravating factor (1) is […]
Criminal Law – The Sentencing Process (Part 1)
With regard to the sentencing of defendants who have been convicted of a criminal offense, the sentence is supposed to result from the balancing of aggravating and mitigating factors which are then applied to the sentencing range for the particular offense. The sentencing range depends on the degree of the offense, as determined by the […]
Confessions Used in Criminal Law
A little known fact about cases involving police interrogations that result in “confessions” is that the confession alone is not enough to sustain a conviction. In addition to the confession, the prosecution must introduce some sort of corroboration of the crime. One reason for this corroboration requirement is that our courts and interrogation experts recognize […]
Legal Defense Against Stale Warrants: Part 3
In the face of a lack of binding precedent in New Jersey, a good attorney will analyze precedent from other jurisdictions in an effort to buttress an otherwise novel argument in New Jersey. In United States v. Elliott, 576 F. Supp. 1579, a 1984 federal case from the Southern District of Ohio, the Court refused […]
- « Previous Page
- 1
- …
- 124
- 125
- 126
- 127
- 128
- …
- 130
- Next Page »