Violation of a Restraining Order in New Jersey
In New Jersey, when there have been allegations of domestic violence, it is customary for the court to issue a restraining order/order of protection. That order will place limits on the actions of the named party, typically preventing him or her from contacting or coming within a certain distance of another person (the purported victim of the domestic violence). The court will typically issue a temporary restraining order (TRO), in place until the court can hold a hearing. At that hearing, the judge will listen to testimony from both parties and will determine whether to terminate the TRO or to make it permanent as a final restraining order (FRO).
As a rule, the restraining order will prevent or limit all types of contact, including by phone, email, text message, letter or card, gift or physical presence. The order can also make it a violation to attempt to use an intermediary, such as a child or co-worker, to convey a message. In addition, the restraining order can require that the named party do certain things, such as pay mortgage or vehicle payments, maintain health insurance on the victim or file tax returns.
The Consequences of Violating a Restraining Order
A restraining order is a court order, with the full force and effect of the state. If you fail to comply with the terms of a restraining order, you can be found in contempt of court, a serious criminal offense. A first conviction for contempt can result in 18 months in jail and fines of up to $25,000. Additional penalties can be imposed for subsequent violations of the order.
Contact the law offices of Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq., Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC.
We offer a free phone consultation to every prospective client. For a complimentary evaluation of your case, contact our office online or call us at 973-898-0161. We will come to your home or the hospital to meet with you, if necessary. All major credit cards are accepted
The Brimage Guidelines in New Jersey Drug Cases
In 1998, in State v. Brimage, the New Jersey Supreme Court set forth guidelines governing mandatory prison sentences for conviction of or pleading to certain drug crimes in the state. The court found that prosecutors had too much control over the sentencing of defendants in certain drug cases, often negotiating lesser terms at time of sentencing. The court required that the state attorney general establish guidelines so that there was greater uniformity in sentencing. These guidelines are now generally referred to as the “Brimage guidelines.”
As a rule, the imposition of the Brimage guidelines has dramatically reduced the instances where a defendant obtains a noncustodial disposition, or a shorter sentence, at the time of sentencing. The guidelines are most often applied in specific situations:
- Convictions involving school zone drug crimes
- Conviction for providing controlled substances to a minor
- Second or repeat drug convictions, for either possession or distribution
- Drug convictions related to street gang activity
If you have pled to or been convicted on a charge that falls under the Brimage guidelines, the prosecutor in your case must complete a worksheet to determine whether the plea offer, or sentencing is appropriate, as well as whether there is eligibility for parole. New Jersey law does, however, give judges some discretion in sentencing in school zone drug crime convictions, based on evidence involving:
- Whether school was open or in session at the time of the arrest
- The location of the crime and the reasonable likelihood that children would have witnessed drug-related activity
- The defendant’s prior criminal record.
Contact Our Office
We offer a free phone consultation to every prospective client. For a complimentary evaluation of your case, contact the law offices of Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq., Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC, online or call us at 973-898-0161. We will come to your home or the hospital to meet with you, if necessary. All major credit cards are accepted.
Juveniles Charges Involving Weapons Possession in New Jersey
New Jersey Laws Governing Juvenile Weapons Possession
The state of New Jersey has some of the toughest weapons possession laws in the country, and minors are no exception to the law. Pursuant to statute, a minor cannot own, purchase or possess any type of firearm, from a BB gun or air gun to a rifle, pistol or shotgun, with four specific exceptions:
- The use of a firearm is permitted as part of a military drill
- The use of a firearm is permitted under the direct supervision of a parent or guardian, but that person must have a valid permit
- A minor may use a firearm at an approved firing range, provided the minor meets the range’s requirements to shoot
- A minor may use a gun to go hunting after passing a firearms safety course and obtaining a hunting license
Penalties for Illegal Possession of Weapons in New Jersey
As a general rule, the simple possession of an unlawful weapon, including a firearm, by a minor in New Jersey is a fourth-degree offense, with potential penalties that include counseling, fines, community service and even jail time. Certain types of offenses, though, carry more severe sanctions. A minor who brings a gun or illegal weapon to school may be charged with a seconddegree indictable offense.
Though the penalties imposed by the juvenile court are generally less severe, there is always the possibility, based on the nature of the offense, that the prosecutor will ask the juvenile court to waive the case, so that it can be tried in adult court. If that happens, the individual potentially faces years of incarceration with adult inmates.
Contact Us
At the law offices of Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq., Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC, we offer a free phone consultation to every prospective client. For a complimentary evaluation of your case, contact our office online or call us at 973-898-0161. We will come to your home or the hospital to meet with you, if necessary. All major credit cards are accepted.
Your Third Conviction for DUI in New Jersey
The Consequences of a Third DUI Conviction in New Jersey
The state of New Jersey takes a hard line when it comes to drinking and driving. If you have been convicted of driving under the influence a third time, here’s what you can expect at the time of sentencing:
- The mandatory loss of your driving privileges for up to 10 years. Judges have no discretion with respect to this provision. They cannot shorten the time and don’t have the option to allow for hardship or work release licenses.
- A jail term of up to six months (180 days)
- Fines of no more than $1,000
- A surcharge on your auto insurance premium for the next three years. For a third conviction, the annual surcharge is $1,500.
- Mandatory detention at an in-patient alcoholism treatment center, where you pay all costs associated with the program. Any time spent in such a facility (up to 90 days) can be credited against the 180-day jail term.
- A fee to be paid to the Intoxicated Driver Resource Center
- A requirement that an ignition interlock device be placed on your car for anywhere from one to three years. The ignition interlock has an alcohol detection device that requires that you blow into it before the car will start. If your blood alcohol is above the legal limit, the car will not operate.
If your driving privileges have been suspended as a result of third DUI conviction and you are pulled over for any reason, you can be charged with driving while suspended, a fourth-degree indictable offense.
Contact the law offices of Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq., Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC.
We offer a free phone consultation to every prospective client. For a complimentary evaluation of your case, contact our office online or call us at 973-898-0161. We will come to your home or the hospital to meet with you, if necessary. All major credit cards are accepted.
Alcohol and Drug Awareness
Understanding the Effects of Alcohol and Drugs
Even though the number of deaths related to drunk driving accidents has declined significantly in the past 30 years, the staggering loss of life caused by drinking and driving indicates that many who drink or take drugs and then get behind the wheel of a car don’t fully understand the impact these substances can have on their mental and physical faculties. Here is what modern science knows about alcohol and drugs and how they impact users.
What Actually Happens to Alcohol in Your System
The physical process of taking in alcohol involves three steps: absorption, transportation and change. Initially, your body allows the alcohol to enter, or be absorbed, into your bloodstream. Next, the alcohol is carried or transported throughout your body by your blood, traveling to vital organs, such as your liver, kidneys and brain. Your body then seeks to transform, or change, the alcohol into a harmless substance, a process that can put great stress on bodily organs like the liver. According to research, any alcohol that you take in will be in your blood system within just half an hour, though this can vary based on several factors, including how much you had to eat and even your gender.
The Effect of Alcohol or Drugs on Your Ability to Drive
Alcohol is known as a depressant — that means that it slows down activity in your brain, including your response time to anything that happens to or around you. It tends to make users drowsy and can make it difficult for you to concentrate on the road. It often interferes with your ability to gather and assess what you see or hear, and it can cause you to focus on one task (looking at the centerline, for example) so that you miss other important information (such as a red light or stop sign).
Of course, a drug may be a stimulant, rather than a depressant. These substances can have a similar impact on your ability to drive, allowing you to misperceive time and distance. For example, you may not be able to properly judge how much time you must pull out in front of another vehicle, or even how close you are to the side of the road or to other vehicles.
Contact Our Office
We offer a free phone consultation to every prospective client. For a complimentary evaluation of your case, contact the law offices of Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq., Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC, online or call us at 973-898-0161. We will come to your home or the hospital to meet with you, if necessary. All major credit cards are accepted.
New Jersey Senate Moves Forward on DogFighting Law
Law to Ban Dog Fighting Approved by Senate Panel
The New Jersey state senate moved a bill forward in May that will criminalize dog-fighting operations and subject anyone participating in such activities to the state’s anti-racketeering statute. The bill also calls for a separate offense of leading a dog-fighting network.
The statute has been on the Senate’s docket for nearly a year, but gathered momentum after large dog-fighting rings were discovered in Paterson and Elizabeth earlier this year. In the Paterson raid, officers rescued three pit bulls after hearing barking, whimpering, cheering and screaming coming from a building on East 16th Street.
According to Senator Tom Kean, Jr., a Republican from Union, dog-fighting rings are typically one small component of a much larger criminal operation. A sponsor of the bill, Kean has proposed that persons arrested be charged with violating New Jersey’s criminal RICO laws, which he says would give prosecutors and those who actively oppose dog-fighting a lot more leverage when gathering evidence.
Calling the dog-fighting activities “the most visible, most violent, most painful example” of criminal activity that crosses state and town lines, Kean said it also involves gambling, drugs and other illegal activity.
If the statute is passes, anyone participating in a dog-fighting ring could be charged with a third-degree crime, with a possible sentence of three to five years in prison and fines of up to $15,000. Because the crime would fall under state RICO laws, though, the penalties could be much more severe. Courts could order the seizure of property related to or obtained with proceeds from dog-fighting, and could order restitution for housing and treatment of any animals harmed.
The proposed law identifies leading a dog-fighting operation as a second degree crime, with sanctions including five to ten years in prison and up to $150,000 in fines.
Contact Us
At the Law Offices of Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq. Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC, We offer a free phone consultation to every prospective client. For a complimentary evaluation of your case, contact our office online or call us at 973-241-7468. We will come to your home or the hospital to meet with you, if necessary. All major credit cards are accepted.
New Jersey Seeks to Amend Marital Privilege Restriction on Evidence
New Jersey Senate Considers Law to Limit Marital Privilege Evidence Exception
Under current New Jersey law, conversations between spouses may not be used in a criminal prosecution, under what is known as the “marital privilege.” If a former Ocean County prosecutor, now a state senator, can muster the votes, the New Jersey Senate will legislate an exception to that privilege. Many other states have already enacted such an exception.
State Senator James Holzapfel proposed a bill that would create a “crime-fraud” exception to the longstanding legal principle. Holzapfel says he was motivated to draft the bill after the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that evidence obtained in a wiretap against a suspected drug dealer could not be used against him because he was discussing his criminal activity with his wife. In its opinion, the Supreme Court said that the law did not allow the evidence to be admitted at trial but suggested that the New Jersey legislature change the law.
The marital privilege, also known as spousal privilege, typically involves two separate privileges: a communications privilege and a testimonial privilege. Under the testimonial privilege, a person’s spouse cannot be called to testify in court in an adverse proceeding. The communications privilege, the subject of Holzapfel’s bill, prohibits prosecutors from using any communication between spouses against one of them in a criminal proceeding. Experts say the general purpose of the marital, or spousal, privilege, is to encourage spousal harmony and to avoid the situation where one spouse must condemn, or be condemned by, a spouse.
Contact the law offices of Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq., Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC.
We offer a free phone consultation to every prospective client. For a complimentary evaluation of your case, contact our office online or call us at 973-898-0161. We will come to your home or the hospital to meet with you, if necessary. All major credit cards are accepted.
New Jersey Lawmakers Look at Ignition Interlock Law
New Jersey Legislators Debate Ignition Interlock Statute
Following the lead of lawmakers in other states, New Jersey legislators have introduced a law to expand the use of ignition interlock devices for individuals convicted of DWI. Current law requires installation of the device for repeat offenders with a blood alcohol content (BAC) or 0.15 or higher. The proposed legislation would mandate an ignition interlock for first-time offenders with a BAC of 0.08 (the legal threshold) to 0.14 but would allow them to drive with an ignition lock for 3 to 12 months in lieu of a having their license suspended. In addition, if the defendant triggers the interlock device, the length of time may be extended or driving privileges may be suspended.
Under the proposed law, the presiding judge would be granted a certain amount of discretion. Based on the facts of the case, the judge could also suspend the defendant’s driving privileges, in addition to requiring the use of an ignition interlock.
An ignition interlock requires that a person blow into a device before the vehicle will start. If the device detects alcohol, the vehicle will be disabled.
Lawmakers say the legislation is necessary because simple license suspensions are not very effective. They cite studies conducted in numerous states that show that at least half of people convicted of drinking and driving ignore their license suspensions. They estimate that one in every three DWI arrests involves a repeat offender. Research indicates that repeat offenders are four times more likely to be involved in a fatal traffic accident as are first-time offenders.
The bill was approved by the New Jersey Assembly in 2014, and the Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee has passed it. It must be voted on by the full Senate and signed by the governor to become law.
Contact the law offices of Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq., Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC, criminal defense attorney in New Jersey.
At the law offices of attorney Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq., Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC, we offer prospective clients charged with crimes a free phone consultation. We can answer your questions, explain your rights and help you understand your options relating to a criminal charge.
Contact our office online or call us at 973-898-0161 for a free consultation. In addition to our criminal law practice, we also represent clients in personal injury law cases.
New Jersey Supreme Court to Consider Right to Jury Trial in DWI Cases
State Supreme Court to Rule on Right to Jury Trial in DWI Cases
On February 17, 2015, the New Jersey Supreme Court agreed to hear oral arguments in an appeal from a New Jersey resident facing a fourth prosecution for drinking and driving. The legal issue the court has been asked to consider? Whether a person charged with DWI in New Jersey has a right to trial by a jury of his or her peers. In the case before the Supreme Court, State of New Jersey v. James R. Denelsbeck, the defendant requested a jury trial in municipal court, but his request was denied. The lower court ruling was affirmed in both the Superior Court and the Appellate Division. Though many perceive the right to trial by jury to be automatic and universal, the U.S. Constitution does not grant such an absolute right. Pursuant to the terms of the 6th Amendment, a defendant only has a right to a jury trial if the potential sanction may be more than six months. Under New Jersey law, Denelsbeck, if convicted, would face a maximum sentence of six months. Accordingly, the trial judge denied the request.
Notwithstanding the provisions of the 6th Amendment, many states have allowed defendants in drunk driving cases have their cases heard and decided by a jury. In New Jersey, however, it has long been the practice to have DWI cases heard in municipal court, where all matters are handled by a judge. Numerous efforts have been made over the last 25 years to move DWI prosecutions to Superior Court, where a defendant may have a jury trial. State officials have resisted the attempt, citing concerns about the costs of the many jury trials that would ensue.
The New Jersey Supreme Court established the current precedent in 1990, in State v. Hamm, concluding that, in New Jersey, a DWI is a motor vehicle infraction instead of a crime. The ruling in Hamm was consistent with a U.S. Supreme Court ruling a year earlier that found that DWI defendants facing a potential incarceration of six months or less do not have a right to trial by jury
Contact the law offices of Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq., Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC, criminal defense attorney in New Jersey.
At the law offices of attorney Gregg A. Wisotsky, Esq., Partner, Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, PC, we offer prospective clients charged with crimes a free phone consultation. We can answer your questions, explain your rights, and help you understand your options relating to a criminal charge.
Contact our office online or call us at 973-898-0161 for a free consultation. In addition to our criminal law practice, we also represent clients in personal injury law cases.
- « Previous Page
- 1
- …
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- …
- 23
- Next Page »
