Drug Court Expungements & The Public Interest: Part 1

by | Sep 1, 2017 | Blog, Criminal Law, Drug Crime, Law Reform and Amendments, Monmouth County, Ocean County

On August 1, 2017, a three judge Appellate Division panel decided the case of I.M.O. of the expungement of the arrest/charge records of T.B., J.N.-T., R.C. The panel included former Monmouth County Criminal Presiding Judge Vernoia. The principle issue before the Court was whether Drug Court graduates who seek expungement under N.J.S. 2C:35-14(m) are required to make the “public interest” showing that is mandated for those seeking expungement of certain third and fourth degree offenses under N.J.S. 2C:52-2(c)(3).

The Court held in relevant part: We are persuaded that a court may grant a Drug Court expungement of a record that includes a conviction for a third- and fourth-degree CDS offense, as described in N.J.S.A. 2C:52-2(c)(3), only if the applicant makes the public interest showing. “The general rule is that when a statute incorporates another by specifically referring to it by title or section number, only the precise terms of the incorporated statute as it then exists become part of the incorporating statute.” By referring to “any offense barred from expungement pursuant to subsection b. or c. of N.J.S.A. 2C:52-2,” N.J.S.A. 2C:35-14(m)(2), the Drug Court expungement statute expressly imports the offenses that bar expungement under N.J.S.A. 2C:52-2(b) and -2(c).

Although Chapter 52 does not absolutely bar expungement of the identified third- and fourth-degree CDS offenses, the bar exists, but for two exceptions. The first exception covers offenses involving small quantities of marijuana and hashish. See N.J.S.A. 2C:52-2(c)(1) and (2). Of principal concern in this appeal, the second exception involves CDS convictions “of the third or fourth degree, where the court finds that expungement is consistent with the public interest, giving due consideration to the nature of the offense and the petitioner’s character and conduct since conviction.” N.J.S.A. 2C:52-2(c)(3).

Generally, exceptions are “strictly but reasonably construed” with any doubts “resolved in favor of the general provision.” Where a general provision in a statute has certain limited exceptions, all doubts should be resolved in favor of the general provision rather than the exceptions.” Therefore, unless and until the exception is satisfied, the “conviction is for an offense barred from expungement pursuant to subsection b. or c. of N.J.S.A. 2C:52-2.” N.J.S.A. 2C:35-14(m)(2).

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
Fred was incredibly helpful during a very stressful time. Even during a pandemic he was fast at responding to any and all questions or problems that I had. He went above and beyond to make sure that I was happy with my results and that my case was being handled properly all the way through. Highly recommend this office!
Toni V
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Muy buen abogado lo rrecomiendo!!
Victor N
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Iv had good lawyers defend me before but Mr.Sisto is beyond the best iv had. He explains everything every step of the way until your court date and excels on getting results , I defenatly recomend his services.
Imer J
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred was extremely helpful and knowledgable. He made the whole process as painless and easy as possible.
Toli C
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Today my life was about to change! With great communication and excellent service he was able to create the impossible!! I am now able to continue to drive for a living!! I highly recommend his services and trust his judgment-HE KNOWS HIS STUFF!!! He saved my life and livelihood today! Mr.Frank Sisto is an absolutely amazing attorney! Thank you again I’ll never forget this day! God Bless
Edward J
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred is a fantastic attorney who is very informative, knows the system well, and is very thorough.
Bob V
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred Sisto's attention to detail, his representation and unwavering advocacy for me made all the difference in my case.
Jill F
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
I have sought out Mr. Sisto for two traffic related cases. His hard work and dedication to getting results for me was very evident from the get go. He was very informative throughout the entire process of working on my cases and during the court sessions as well. Very professional and very friendly. If anyone in the area is looking for a very good and quality representation, Mr. Sisto is a go to.
Brett S
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred Sisto is a professional, knowledgeable, and exceptional attorney. He is very responsive and maintains continuous contact with his clients via phone and email. Fred made sure that we understood the charges and was able to work on getting us the best outcome possible. He even went above and beyond in the court room by assisting with translation from English to Spanish. I highly recommend him to anyone who is in need of legal services and representation. In the future if needed I would definitely use him again as an attorney.
Sara A