“Recognizing that administrative burdens are placed on police departments when the charging decision is delayed and police are required to maintain custody of a defendant pending that decision, notwithstanding the provisions of subsection 2.2.2, if either the Live Scan system or the Judiciary ‘s automated PSA system is not operational, or if the results of […]

“In any case where there is probable cause to believe the defendant has committed any indictable crime, disorderly persons offense, or petty disorderly offense and the case is not otherwise covered under Section 4.4 (mandatory charging by complaint-warrant) or Section 4.5 (presumption of charging by complaint-warrant), a law enforcement agency shall issue a complaint-summons unless […]

“The automated pretrial risk-assessment process may not account for all relevant circumstances. For example, it does not account for the fact-sensitive manner in which the present offense was committed that might suggest that the defendant is especially dangerous (e.g., the defendant inflicted more serious harm than that required to establish the elements of the charged […]

“The automated pretrial risk-assessment process accounts for the general nature of the present offense (e.g., whether it involves violence) and certain electronically-stored criminal case and court history data that documents the defendant’s previous involvement, if any, in the adult criminal justice system. This automated process produces a Public Safety Assessment (PSA) that provides three pretrial […]

“Each County Prosecutor and the Division of Criminal Justice shall establish a system of on­ call assistant prosecutors and deputy attorneys general to be available on a 24/7 basis to provide real­ time legal advice and charging approvals to law enforcement officers pursuant to this Directive.6 All assistant prosecutors and deputy attorneys general assigned to […]

“The systems and policies established in this Directive depend on police and prosecutors following the correct sequence of steps to initiate the automated pretrial risk-assessment process. See also subsection 2.2.1. The State Police and AOC have established an interface between the Live Scan fingerprint system and eCDR. The interface transmits confirmed Live Scan records to […]

“The automated pretrial risk-assessment process is initiated by police after the defendant’s fingerprints have been taken by Live Scan at a police station. A preliminary public safety assessment is made available to police and prosecutors before the complaint-summons versus complaint-warrant decision is made. If a complaint-warrant is approved by a judge or other judicial officer, […]

“Charging by complaint-summons rather than by complaint-warrant generally would be appropriate when the facts known at the time of the charging decision reliably indicate that the defendant requires no monitoring or only minimal monitoring upon release. A complaint-warrant, in contrast, generally should be sought when the defendant poses a moderate or high risk of flight, […]

“The decision whether to charge by complaint-warrant rather than complaint-summons has other legally-significant consequences besides the initial incarceration of the defendant pending completion of the recommendation process conducted by the pretrial services program. A prosecutor cannot file a motion to have the defendant preventively detained pending trial unless the defendant has been charged by complaint-warrant. […]

“The decision whether to charge by complaint-summons (commonly referred to as a CDR-1)  or complaint-warrant (commonly referred to as a CDR-2) takes on enhanced significance under the Bail Reform Law. The issuance of a complaint-warrant is the triggering event for many of the provisions of the new law defining the universe of so-called “eligible defendants” […]