The New Jersey Supreme Court draws guidance from precedent that interpreted a law similar to the CJRA. The traditional balancing test for due process claims does not require the State to present live testimony at every hearing. Pretrial detention significantly interferes with a defendant’s liberty interest, but extensive safeguards protect that critical interest. And to […]
Evidence at Detention Hearings: Part 4
Defendant claims that his right to due process requires the State to call a live witness at a pretrial detention hearing. Defendant focuses on the need for live testimony for the State to establish probable cause, not to argue for detention. The CJRA, N.J.S.A. 2A:162-15 to -26, in many respects follows the federal Bail Reform […]
Evidence at Detention Hearings: Part 3
The New Jersey Supreme Court held that neither the statute’s plain language nor principles of due process require the State to present testimony from a live witness at every detention hearing. Instead, the State may proceed by proffer to try to satisfy its burden of proof and show that detention is warranted. Trial judges, however, […]
Evidence at Detention Hearings: Part 2
The trial court rejected defendant’s claims. The court first found that the State could proceed by proffer at a detention hearing. The court relied on the language and legislative history of the CJRA and also looked to federal law for support. The court noted as well that judges had discretion to order witness testimony. Next, […]
Evidence at Detention Hearings: Part 1
On August 1, 2017, Chief Justice Rabner wrote for a unanimous New Jersey Supreme Court in the case of State v. Amed Ingram. The principle issue was whether the Criminal Justice Reform Act requires the State to present testimony from a live witness at detention hearings. Under the Criminal Justice Reform Act (CJRA), which went […]
English
Spanish