Unlawful Possession of a Weapon (Part 1)

by | Jan 4, 2019 | Blog, Criminal Law, Monmouth County, New Jersey, Ocean County

On October 30, 2018, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided the Union County case of State v. Rainlin Vasco. The principal issue was whether the defendant’s guilty plea to fourth degree unlawful possession of a weapon was supported by an adequate factual basis when he stated during the colloquy that he did not have a lawful purpose for possessing a knife but did not admit to any specific circumstances that made the possession “manifestly inappropriate”. The Court issued a “per curiam” opinion, meaning that no particular Justice authored the decision because the court agreed that the case involved a straightforward application of the law to the facts of the case. Therefore, there was no occasion for s particular justice to conduct their own legal analysis.

Here, a unanimous Court reversed the opinion of the three-judge appellate panel for the reasons expressed by the one dissenting judge, Judge Espinosa. This is likely a source of pride for Judge Espinosa as she took a position contrary to the majority of her panel and her minority position was unanimously adopted by the New Jersey Supreme Court.

The per curiam opinion and Judge Espinosa’s related dissent read in relevant part as follows: The judgment of the Superior Court, Appellate Division is reversed substantially for the reasons expressed in Judge Espinosa’s dissenting opinion, reported at ___ N.J. Super. ___, ___ (App. Div. 2017) (Espinosa, J.A.D., dissenting). Defendant’s guilty plea is vacated and the matter is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.

The essential elements of an offense under N.J.S.A. 2C:39-5(d) are (1) there was a weapon, (2) defendant possessed the weapon knowingly, and (3) the defendant’s possession of the weapon was under circumstances not manifestly appropriate for a lawful use. Model Jury Charge (Criminal), “Unlawful Possession of a Weapon, N.J.S.A. 2C:39-5d” (2005).

During the course of his plea colloquy, defendant admitted he knowingly possessed a weapon. He admitted little else. In the first attempted plea colloquy, he stated, “I had a lawful purpose, like, I didn’t want to do anything unlawful. I just possessed it.”

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
Thank you very much for your information on DUI check points. It is a great asset to the community . 5 stars for sure!
James P
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Not to long ago I ran into a very serious legal issue for the first time in my life, I'm closing in on 60. Needless to say I was unsure of the process. I was fortunate that a friend recommended Fred. Fred handled my case in a professional and courteous manner yet was very down to earth and straight forward. It took nearly 9 month to resolve and during that time Fred was always available to answer questions, explain the process and most of all alleviate my stress. I feel we got the best possible outcome and I would highly recommend Fred to anyone facing a legal/criminal matter
Manny P
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Great that Fred posts DUI for Monmouth County!
David F
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
I recently utilized his exceptional services and would highly recommend them to anyone seeking legal advice.
Mark A
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Mr. Fred Sisto is really an amazing attorney! Professional, knowledgeable, and effective. He made me feel comfortable in knowing he was working countless hours on my case to get me the best possible outcome. Mr. Sisto was very responsive and kept me updated with all court proceedings/updates. I am thankful to have had him represent me. I will be recommending Mr. Sisto & his firm to anyone in need. Thanks again ! Much Appreciated
Javier B
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Called back within 10 minutes,very easy to talk to. Not judgmental at all. I am hopeful about the outcome.
Colleen H
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
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
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Mr. Sisto was not only a knowledgeable and excellent lawyer, he was compassionate and understanding during this difficult time. I found Mr. Sisto to always be available and he services were affordable and effective. You will not find a better lawyer.
Joseph S
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Always up to date on with his services.
Anthony L
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
He is the best professional to have on your side taking care of your interests. Your in the best of hands.
Stuart C