Fred Sisto | Criminal Attorney | Ocean and Monmouth County

Call Us Today
732-898-3232

  • Home
  • Criminal Defense Services
    ▼
    • Drug Crimes
      ▼
      • Drug Manufacturing
      • Intent to Distribute Narcotics
      • Prescription Drug Crimes
      • Leader of Narcotics Trafficking Network
    • Weapons Charges
      ▼
      • Prohibited Weapons and Devices
      • Manufacture, Transport, etc. of Weapons
      • Illegal Possession of a Gun
      • Possession of Weapons for Unlawful Purposes
    • Expungements
    • Theft Attorney
    • Violent Crimes
      ▼
      • Robbery/Burglary
      • Manslaughter
      • Extortion
      • Assault
      • Sexual Offenses
    • Arson
    • DUI / DWI
      ▼
      • Alcohol DUI
      • Drug DUI
      • Refusing a Breath Test
    • Driving with A Suspended License
    • Property Forfeiture
    • Anti-Drug Profiteering
    • Juvenile Delinquency
  • Español / Spanish Speaking Attorney
  • About
    ▼
    • Testimonials
    • Defending Cases In
      ▼
      • Monmouth County
      • Ocean County
  • Blog
  • Contact
    ▼
    • Receive a Call From Fred
  • DUI Checkpoint Alerts
  • Results
  • Payment Options
  • Home
  • Criminal Defense Services
    • Drug Crimes
      • Drug Manufacturing
      • Intent to Distribute Narcotics
      • Prescription Drug Crimes
      • Leader of Narcotics Trafficking Network
    • Weapons Charges
      • Prohibited Weapons and Devices
      • Manufacture, Transport, etc. of Weapons
      • Illegal Possession of a Gun
      • Possession of Weapons for Unlawful Purposes
    • Expungements
    • Theft Attorney
    • Violent Crimes
      • Robbery/Burglary
      • Manslaughter
      • Extortion
      • Assault
      • Sexual Offenses
    • Arson
    • DUI / DWI
      • Alcohol DUI
      • Drug DUI
      • Refusing a Breath Test
    • Driving with A Suspended License
    • Property Forfeiture
    • Anti-Drug Profiteering
    • Juvenile Delinquency
  • Español / Spanish Speaking Attorney
  • About
    • Testimonials
    • Defending Cases In
      • Monmouth County
      • Ocean County
  • Blog
  • Contact
    • Receive a Call From Fred
  • DUI Checkpoint Alerts
  • Results
  • Payment Options
Home >> Pre-Trial Intervention Program (PTI) – (Part 4)

February 11, 2016 by Fred Sisto

Pre-Trial Intervention Program (PTI) – (Part 4)

To apply Guideline 3(i) and the long out-dated narcotics scheduling of marijuana under these circumstances (mentioned in part 3 of this blog) would lead to an absurd result. The narcotics schedules were published in 1970. See N.J.S.A 24:21-1 et seq. In 1972, a congressionally created commission called the National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse, whose members were appointed by then President Richard Nixon, completed one of the most comprehensive reviews ever undertaken regarding marijuana and public policy. Their report, “Marijuana: A Signal of Misunderstanding,” proclaimed that “from what is now known about the effects of marijuana, its use at the present level does not constitute a major threat to public health,” and recommended Congress and state legislatures decriminalize the use and casual distribution of marijuana for personal use (emphasis added). See http://norml.org/library/health-reports

Thus, applying the rebuttable presumption against PTI admission for a fourth degree marijuana distribution (or possession with the intent to distribute) would create a barrier to admission where no  barrier exists for the more serious third and fourth degree distribution of the following schedule III, IV, and V narcotics: anabolic steroids, barbiturates, buprenorphine, dihydrocodeine, ketamine, GHB, marinol, Benzphetamine, lysergic acid amide, benzodiazepines, phenobarbital, opiod analgesics, and Tramadol, among others. See N.J.S.A 24:21-1 et seq. Since courts should avoid legal interpretations that lead to absurd or unreasonable results, PTI Guideline 3(i) should not apply to fourth degree marijuana distribution. See State v. Meyer, 192 N.J. 421, 436 (2007). Note that an additional level of absurdity is present with regard to a presumption against PTI admission that applies to natural marijuana, but not to synthetic marijuana (marinol).

Additionally, Guideline 3(i) should be relaxed when the case does not involve the manner of predatory “drug distribution” that justifies a rebuttable presumption against admission. Such is the case with the majority of drug distribution cases.

“Drug distribution” has an overly broad definition under our law. The definition covers conduct ranging from a predator that sells lethal drugs to other dealers or addicts and thereby profits from human misery while personally abstaining from drug use. On the other end of the “drug distribution” spectrum are two friends who occasionally share their small, personal supplies of marijuana with each other, depending on who happens to be in possession on a given day. The facts underlying most cases are consistent with the latter, far more benign scenario. The only recognized exception to drug distribution under a “sharing” theory is an extremely narrow one. It only applies when two people arrive at a supplier’s location together, commingle their money in exchange for a quantity drugs, and take joint possession of the drug at the exact same time with the intent to consume the drug together. See State v. Morrison, 188 N.J. 2 (2006).

Filed Under: Blog, Criminal Law, News Tagged With: Criminal Law, Legal Procedures

Testimonials

Fred is a stickler for detail and communicates with clients very, very well. He is smart and astute. I would recommend him unconditionally.

Tom O   

I would highly recommend Mr. Sisto. He is very insightful and proficient, yet still down to Earth. Fred is great at communicating and breaking down the facts. But most importantly, he excels at getting results.

Bill K   

Thanks to Fred I have no criminal record whatsoever.

Luke A   

Great!!! , got my case handled in the exact manner that I was told and would recommend to everyone else in need of legal representation.

Raumelis R   
See More Testimonials

Recent Posts

  • Drug Recognition Evidence (Part 3)
  • Drug Recognition Evidence (Part 2)
  • Drug Recognition Evidence (Part 1)
  • Shoplifting and Sales Tax (Part 2)
  • Shoplifting and Sales Tax (Part 1)
  • Handgun Permit-To-Carry Applications (Part 3)
  • Handgun Permit-To-Carry Applications (Part 2)
  • Handgun Permit-To-Carry Applications (Part 1)

Recent Speaking Engagement

Site Disclaimer

Attorney Referral Fees

Frederick P Sisto has earned Lawyer Legion's recognition for Community Leadership
 
Top Criminal Defense Attorney in Brick

Law Office of Frederick P. Sisto

Point Pleasant Office*:
302 Hawthorne Ave, Suite 1
Point Pleasant Beach, NJ 08742

Brick Township Office*:
223 Drum Point Road, Suite 1
Brick Township, NJ 08723

Sea Girt Office*:
2150 NJ-35,
Suite 225
Sea Girt, NJ 08750

Phone: 732-898-3232
Fax: 201-508-3393
*Office visits by appointment only.

Representing clients throughout all court jurisdictions of New Jersey.

WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE CRIMINAL TRIAL ATTORNEY CERTIFICATION, NO ASPECT OF THIS ADVERTISEMENT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY

en English
en Englishes Spanish