Extrinsic evidence supports our reading of the statutes in question. Proposed Assembly bill, A. 1978 (2022) would amend N.J.S.A. 2C:36A-1(e) to provide that “a person who has previously participated in . . . supervisory treatment . . . shall be eligible for supervisory treatment under this section if the previous supervisory treatment concerned . . . offenses involving . . . marijuana . . . subject to conditional discharge pursuant to this section.” The bill would further amend the PTI statute to state: “A person who previously received . . . a conditional discharge . . . shall be eligible for supervisory treatment . . . if the previous supervisory treatment concerned . . . marijuana.” Ibid. The bill synopsis explains “that a defendant who participated in a diversion program for certain marijuana offenses on prior occasion may again participate under certain circumstances.” Ibid.
The Sponsor’s Statement to the proposed bill states: Under current law, these programs require that the person wishing to participate not have been a previous participant in that particular program or in another diversionary program. Under the bill, previous participation in a diversionary program would no longer bar participation on a second occasion if the first participation was for a marijuana . . . offense that was subsequently decriminalized. [Sponsor’s Statement to A. 1978 15-16 (Jan. 11, 2022).]
The Court’s may be overlooking how long it took for an agreement regarding marijuana law reform to be reached, along with the fact that numerous proposed bills were scrapped or amended during the long process. The focus on this one proposed bill without a broad understanding of the entire process presents a distorted view of the Legislature’s intent.