Investigatory Detentions (Part 2)

by | Mar 21, 2019 | Blog, Criminal Law, Monmouth County, New Jersey, Ocean County

The Court continued in relevant part: The officers then asked Reevey and the other occupants of the room for their identification. The officers relayed the occupants’ information to dispatch to check for outstanding warrants. Officer Harris stated that the occupants of the room were not allowed to leave until the results of their individual warrant checks came back. The occupants were released from the scene on an individual basis, as each was cleared by the dispatcher.

Officer Harris did not issue any noise violation summons.  He testified that the “investigation was complete when Reevey agreed to turn the noise down and he decided not to give her a summons for the ordinance violation.” When asked, however, why he and the other officers did not leave once Reevey turned the music down, Officer Harris explained that it is standard police practice to obtain a person’s identification in the course of issuing a summons for violation of a noise ordinance. According to Officer Harris, one of the reasons that identification is obtained is in the event of a callback to that location. The officers detained the occupants for a total of about twenty minutes while awaiting the results of the warrant checks.

The results of the warrant checks began to come back at 12:21 a.m., and at least three individuals were released. Woodard was cleared at 12:23 a.m. but either chose to stay on the premises or was not released. The warrant check for Chisum came back positive for warrants at 12:32 a.m., and he was placed under arrest. After handcuffing Chisum and escorting him into the hallway, Officer Harris conducted a search incident to arrest and patted Chisum down for weapons, revealing a handgun tucked into his waistband. The handgun was retrieved, and Chisum was secured in the hallway.  Officer Harris ordered the remaining occupants in Room 221 to place their hands above their heads and informed them that they would all be patted down for weapons. The pat-down of Woodard revealed that he also possessed a handgun. The handgun was seized, and Woodard was placed under arrest.  Chisum and Woodard were indicted for weapons offenses.

The court did not address the contradictory nature of Officer Harris’s testimony. He claimed that it is standard practice to obtain identification in the course of issuing a summons while also claiming that he did not issue a summons.

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
Mr Sisto is an excellent lawyer. The tickets I received were nothing compared to the charges i had originally. I got the best possible outcome for my case, and Mr Sisto was incredibly understanding and patient and responded to any questions I had within about 30 minutes of me asking them. I'll be going to him again for any legal trouble I have in the future
Brandon K
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
mr. fred sisto esq. was very professional, answered all questions i had, & made my husband & i feel more at ease about our criminal case.
Meridith T
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred never represented me but been in touch with him a few times and was a very professional experience from the minute I called the office
Jj B
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred is a very competent attorney. He is knowledgeable, thorough, effective and possesses outstanding interpersonal skills. He provided excellent representation in my case and obtained a favorable outcome.
Michael G
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
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
Mr. Sisto was knowledgeable preofessional and experienced. He knew the right steps to take every step of the way and went above and beyond to make sure that I understood the situation. Mr. Sisto will have your back in any legal matter!
Corey S
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
2 👍🏻👍🏻 up
Cc
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Very informative. Would not hesitate to use Attorney Sisto.
Rose C
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Realmente es un gran abogado, me ayudo muchísimo en todo este proceso y sobre todo que habla español que es una de las cosas importantes para mi. Por que lo hizo mas entendible y facil cada una de las cosas que tenía que hacer y su amabilidad y paciencia para poder explicarme qué tenía que hacer. Además que mi caso fue un éxito gracias a él ya cada uno de sus conocimientos y a su apoyo en todo momento. Lo recomiendo 100%.
Luis A