State’s Drug Court Appeals: Part 2

by | Jan 5, 2018 | Blog, Criminal Law, Drug Crime

The State argues defendant was convicted of second-degree leaving the scene of a fatal accident, N.J.S.A. 2C:11-5.1, and was therefore subject to the presumption of incarceration. The State reasons that because the court imposed the non-custodial sentence of special probation Drug Court sentence for the second-degree offense, its appeal is expressly authorized. We disagree.

The State’s reliance on N.J.S.A. 2C:44-1(f)(2) is misplaced. Although the statute authorizes the State to appeal a non-custodial or probationary sentence for a first or second-degree offender, we find it does not authorize an appeal by the State where a court imposes a special probation Drug Court sentence pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2C:35-14.

When N.J.S.A. 2C:44-1(f)(2) was enacted in 1978, the only means by which first or second-degree offenders could be sentenced to a non-custodial or probationary sentence was if the court made the findings necessary under N.J.S.A. 2C:44-1(d) to overcome the presumption of incarceration. Thus, by granting the State the right to appeal a non-custodial or probationary sentence for a first and second-degree offender, the Legislature could have only intended to authorize the State to appeal a court’s determination under N.J.S.A. 2C:44-1(d) that “imprisonment would be a serious injustice which overrides the need to deter such conduct by others.”

Here, the court’s imposition of defendant’s Drug Court sentence did not require a determination under N.J.S.A. 2C:44-1(d). Defendant’s sentence was imposed under a separate statute, N.J.S.A. 2C:35-14, which was not enacted until nine years after N.J.S.A. 2C:44-1(f)(2). Imposition of a noncustodial Drug Court sentence under N.J.S.A. 2C:35-14 requires an analysis under a wholly different statutory standard. Because N.J.S.A. N.J.S.A. 2C:44-1(f)(2) was enacted to permit only an appeal of a court’s sentencing determination under N.J.S.A. N.J.S.A. 2C:44-1(d), we find it inapplicable to an appeal from a determination to impose a non-custodial Drug Court sentence.

This holding has great significance to drug court applicants. Drug Court prosecutors routinely reject applicants for bases that no longer apply because the related statutes are convoluted and too many attorneys do not have a handle on the present state of the law.

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