The Court concluded with the following in relevant part: Although there is no need to make any further inquiry, our decision is also supported by the legislative history, which suggests an intent to create an expansive scheme to criminalize an increasing number of dangerous behaviors. The original text, now thirty years old, was limited to luring a child into a motor vehicle. By contrast, the current statute criminalizes two actions (luring and enticing), by unlimited means (electronic or any other), with two categories of victims (children or those reasonably believed to be children), a wide number of prohibited enticements (motor vehicles, structures, isolated areas, and meetings or appearances at any other place), and a broadly stated purpose element (to commit a criminal offense with or against the child).
In addition, analyzing this statute in relation to our kidnapping statute, N.J.S.A. 2C:13-1, also undermines defendant’s position. The kidnapping statute was meant to address the kind of danger isolation poses to a child, and such isolation and danger can certainly be present at the child’s own home, especially where, as here, the child is confirmed to be home alone. See State v. Cruz-Pena, (2020) (kidnapping occurs when the victim is confined to one place for a substantial period, citing to a litany of cases where kidnapping-by-confinement occurs in places where the victim would still otherwise be); State v. LaFrance (1990) (confining a victim to his own bedroom for a substantial period in order to isolate the man’s wife and sexually assault her constituted kidnapping).
Defendant’s request that the principle of lenity support an interpretation in his favor is similarly unavailing, and is not required, given the unambiguous text and expansive legislative history. The fact that other statutes such as the child endangerment statute, N.J.S.A. 2C:24-4, might also criminalize a defendant’s behavior does not compel us to adopt a crabbed interpretation of N.J.S.A. 2C:13-6(a).
The analysis of the kidnapping statute brings up a point that most people do not realize. It is kidnapping if someone is tied up to facilitate a burglary inside their home.
