Changes to Marijuana-Related Expungements (Part 4)

by Fred Sisto | Feb 10, 2020 | Blog, Criminal Law, Drug Crime, Marijuana, Monmouth County, Ocean County

Amendments to 2C:52-2 continued as follows:

For purposes of determining eligibility to present an expungement application to the Superior Court pursuant to this section, a conviction for unlawful distribution of, or possessing or having under control with intent to distribute, marijuana or hashish in violation of paragraph (11) of subsection b. of N.J.S.2C:35-5, or a lesser amount of marijuana or hashish in violation of paragraph (12) of subsection b. of that section, or a violation of either of those paragraphs and a violation of subsection a. of section 1 of P.L.1987, c.101 (C.2C:35-7) or subsection a. of section 1 of P.L.1997, c.327 (C.2C:35-7.1), for distributing, or possessing or having under control with intent to distribute, on or within 1,000 feet of any school property, or on or within 500 feet of the real property comprising a public housing facility, public park, or public building, or for obtaining or possessing marijuana or hashish in violation of paragraph (3) of subsection a. of N.J.S.2C:35-10, or for an equivalent crime in another jurisdiction, regardless of when the conviction occurred, shall not be considered a conviction of a crime within this State or any other jurisdiction but shall instead be considered a conviction of a disorderly persons¹ offense within this State or an equivalent category of offense within the other jurisdiction, and a conviction for obtaining, possessing, using, being under the influence of, or failing to make lawful disposition of marijuana or hashish in violation of paragraph (4) of subsection a., or subsection b., or subsection c. of N.J.S.2C:35-10, or a violation involving marijuana or hashish as described herein and using or possessing with intent to use drug paraphernalia with that marijuana or hashish in violation of N.J.S.2C:36-2, or for an equivalent crime or offense in another jurisdiction, regardless of when the conviction occurred, shall not be considered a conviction within this State or any other jurisdiction.

All of the underlined language is new to the expungement statutes. The effect of treating these marijuana “crimes” as disorderly persons offenses is to increase expungement eligibility and decrease the expungement eligibility waiting period.

      Excellent rating  
 Based on 288 reviews 
    
  
 
 
      Affordable, knowledgeable, efficient.
     Deb W 
 
 
 
 
    Highly  professional

The lawyer Frederick is a serious and professional person, he helped me a lot in my case, I recommend him a lot to help you too, he is always in contact with you explaining the process, a very patient and kind person.
     Ca 
 
 
 
 
    I recently utilized his exceptional services and would highly recommend them to anyone seeking legal advice.
     Mark A 
 
 
 
 
    Hired Mr.Sisto to handle a case of mine a couple of months ago and while the service was okay the customer service was awful. When I had inquired about a charge I was unsure of on my bill, Mr. Sisto immediately got defensive and had the unprofessionalism to ask me if I “was high” for asking this question. I wonder if Mr. Sisto asks all of his clients this question or only the ones who have jobs in the cannabis industry? Regardless, I don’t believe this was an appropriate question to ask, regardless of the industry one works in, and therefore Mr. Sisto needs to heavily work on his customer service.

Edit: Mr. Sisto had the UNPROFESSIONALISM to reach out to my family and ask them to ask me to take down my review instead of reaching out directly towards me when it was I who was his client, not my family. Clearly speaks to the unprofessionalism surrounding this practice. This has not been the only time Mr.Sisto has gone directly to my family instead of me, his client, for important legal matters and I will not seek out his services again.

For those who may not understand Spanish, the email starts with “You should speak to your daughter regarding the review she has just published.”

Edit to Response: As an attorney, one should be able to make appropriate questions and comments regardless if a client is “uncooperative” or “disrespectful.” The fact that rather than apologizing for the awful interaction with your firm, and I was not released  “within hours” as you claim shows how low value your firm is and how you openly  instead chose to harass my family through email for my initial review rather than actually revomy case which I ended up doing and you chareged me for . Regardless of results, your character speaks volumes and anyone who reads this would know better than to give their money to an awful person such as yourself. What a shame
     Ximena C 
 
 
 
 
    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 
 
 
 
 
    gives great heads up info--- and helps public get around safely
     Sun B 
 
 
 
 
    Fred has helped me on two different occasions with his legal practice and is a top notch attorney. He also gives great advice as a person to go with his legal expertise. Highly recommend anyone looking for an attorney to contact Fred!
     Connor W 
 
 
 
 
    Keeps me well informed ! Thank you
     Koy T 
 
 
 
 
    Fred has been exceptional as my counsel. Represented me with professionalism and understanding. Fred does communicate with you and gives the best he can. I recommend Fred if you need a good professional understanding straight forward counsel. Thank you Fred!
     Mohammed 
 
 
 
 
    Great site Fred. keep up the good work at informing the public of these unlawful check points.
     Mark H