Drug Court Applicant Classifications (Part 3)

by | Apr 14, 2021 | Blog, Criminal Law, Drug Crime, Monmouth County, New Jersey, Ocean County

The Appellate Division continued in relevant part: Although a Drug Court judge is not bound by a substance abuse evaluator’s recommendation for in-patient drug treatment, the evaluation is a critical component of a decision to grant or deny admission into the Drug Court program. The substance abuse evaluator’s recommendation can assist in the judge’s consideration of a defendant’s need for treatment and the probable effect of any addiction on future criminal behavior. A remand is necessary for the Drug Court judge to consider the substance abuse evaluator’s report.

The State candidly acknowledged at oral argument before us that a full review was not done in some of the cases in this consolidated appeal because the trial court did not have the benefit of TASC evaluations. A remand is therefore needed in any case before us where the trial court did not consider a TASC evaluation unless the record clearly shows that the defendant is a Track One candidate who is legally ineligible for special probation and thus categorically ineligible for admission to Drug Court.

As we have noted, as a general proposition, we review a sentencing court’s decision to admit or deny admission to Drug Court for an abuse of discretion. By its action to remove the prosecutorial veto, the Legislature clearly evinced an intention to rely on a judge’s discretion and ability to better determine admission without continuing that right to veto. Appellate courts review sentences only to determine: “(1) whether the exercise of discretion by the sentencing court was based upon findings of fact grounded in competent, reasonably credible evidence; (2) whether the sentencing court applied the correct legal principles in exercising its discretion; and (3) whether the application of the facts to the law was such a clear error of judgement that it shocks the conscience.”

Since Drug Court’s inception, TASC evaluations have been a critical component. The two main eligibility inquiries are whether an applicant is (1) legally eligible and (2) clinically eligible. The TASC is the most important element of clinical eligibility.

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
Affordable, knowledgeable, efficient.
Deb W
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
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
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
I recently utilized his exceptional services and would highly recommend them to anyone seeking legal advice.
Mark A
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
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
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
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
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
gives great heads up info--- and helps public get around safely
Sun B
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
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
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Keeps me well informed ! Thank you
Koy T
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
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
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Great site Fred. keep up the good work at informing the public of these unlawful check points.
Mark H