The New Jersey Supreme Court continued in relevant part: The Parole Board cannot mandate participation in an RTP for inmates administratively paroled under the EYWO Act. Although N.J.S.A. 30:4-123.59 generally authorizes the Parole Board to impose parole conditions on...
On August 3, 2023, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided the case of Leander Williams v. New Jersey State Parole Board. The principal issue concerned whether the parole board could mandate participation in adult residential treatment program for inmates paroled under...
Justice Noriega filed a dissenting opinion. He wrote that the majority expanded the previously narrow abandonment exception to New Jersey’s automatic standing rule by making abandonment synonymous with flight. In Justice Noriega’s view, it is a step backwards in New...
Justice Solomon continued in relevant part: In Johnson, the Court held that the defendant had not surrendered his standing to challenge the search of a bag solely because he had disclaimed ownership, given that the bag was in an apartment with five occupants and could...
The New Jersey Supreme Court majority continued in relevant part: While other officers chased and arrested defendant, one officer secured and searched the suitcase at the entrance of the station, revealing the contraband. Defendant was charged with possessory offenses...
On January 17, 2024, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided the Essex County case of State v. Curtis Gartrell. The principal issue before the Court concerned whether the defendant had standing to challenge the search of property that the police searched without a...
The three-judge panel concluded with the following in relevant part: Each local system makes its own determinations about who is required to register, which crimes are registerable offenses, what information offenders must provide, and what consequences are inherent...
Judge Puglisi continued in relevant part: "SORNA classifies sex offenders into three risk tiers--Tiers I, II, and III--for registration and notification purposes, depending solely on the nature of the offense." Id. at 62 (citing 34 U.S.C. § 20911). "The offender's...
The Appellate Division continued in relevant part: J.R. relies heavily on his assertion that, regardless of his residency in another state, he nevertheless continues to have Megan's Law "status" in New Jersey. We reject this argument because there is no legal "status"...
On January 31, 2024, a three-judge appellate panel decided the Middlesex County case of IN the Matter of Registrant J.R. The principal issue before the Court under N.J.S.A. 2C:7-2 concerned whether the resident of another state had standing to seek termination of his...