State v. Sharp, App.
Div.
New Jersey’s Appellate Division recently agreed with a
County prosecutor’s office that prior traffic convictions for Driving while
Suspended is a correct reason to deny someone from the county’s PTI
program. Mr. Sharp applied for PTI at the county level after he was
indicted for driving while suspended after having been previously convicted in
municipal court for numerous (4) prior NJSA 39:3-40 driving while suspended
charges. N.J.S.A. 2C:40-26a and b. is a 4th degree
criminalization of serial 3:40 defendants while up to 18 months of
incarceration.
After the trial judge Ordered the Prosecutor’s office to
admit Mr. Sharp into their PTI program over their objections the state
appealed. The appellate panel ruled that the judge erred in finding that the
prosecutor's decision to deny defendant PTI admission was a patent and gross
abuse of discretion. The court agreed with the prosecutor’s office telling them
and all other county prosecutors that defendants with numerous prior 3:40
convictions in municipal court are unacceptable candidates for PTI admission
based on their terrible driving records, which indicated a pattern of
anti-social behavior and lack of amenability to rehabilitation.
As a
result, this and all other defendants with numerous prior 39:3-40 convictions,
whose cases are referred to the county prosecutor’s office for indictment under
NJSA 2C:40-26 (a) and (b) are looking at mandatory jail time, probation, and NO
entry into their county’s PTI program.
Submitted by Jeffrey Hark, a new jersey criminal lawyer http://www.harklawnj.com/
This information is really very useful and I have recently read this type of information in my law book through which I am doing the law degree.
ReplyDeletesex crime lawyer miami