Archive for February 2012

New Jersey Supreme Court Rules On Appeal From New Jersey Lawyer Concerning Sex Crime And Permanent Ban On Public Office

In 2007 the defendant, a Sheriff’s Officer and part-time police officer, pled guilty to fourth-degree criminal sexual contact. The defendant denied having sex with the victim without her consent after a night of drinking. Later tests revealed the victim was pregnant and there was a 99.9 percent chance that the defendant was the father. A Superior Court Judge sentenced the defendant to two years of probation and that the forfeiture statute, N.J.S.A. 2C:51-2d, applied to the case. N.J.S.A. 2C:51-2d requires one holding public office to forfeit that office.
A New Jersey lawyer appealed the forfeiture statute, arguing the statute unwarranted since the defendant’s crime was not related to his job. A split Appellate Division reversed the permanent prohibition.

Click here to review John F. Renner’s background as a New Jersey Criminal Defense Attorney.

Legal Quote of the Week:

“Laws do not persuade just because they threaten”

Seneca, Epistuale Morales ad Lucilium, 63-65

United States Appeals Court Reinstates New Jersey Lawyer’s Violation Of The RICO Statute

Between 2003 and 2009 the defendant, a high-profile New Jersey lawyer, allegedly led an extensive criminal enterprise causing him to face a 39-count indictment. Three of the counts of the defendant’s indictment were in violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.

The District Court dismissed the RICO case; holding that the indictment “did not adequately allege a racketeering ‘enterprise’ or a ‘pattern of racketeering activity.’” The government appealed the decision of the District Court arguing that the District Court neglected to accept all of the facts alleged in the indictment.

The U.S. appeals court reinstated the defendant’s violation of RICO stating that six of the indictment acts predicate to a criminal enterprise under RICO. The Court held that the acts posed a threat of continued criminal activity which asserted a pattern of racketeering activity.

Go here to see John F. Renner’s federal criminal defense practice in NJ

Legal Quote of the Week:

“Organized crime inevitably gravitates to cash”

Daniel Deligman

NJ Lawyers Appellate Division Ruling

E.M.B. v. R.F.B., A-1155-09

NEW JERSEY LAWYERS APPELLATE DIVISION RULING STATING THAT INDEPENDENTLY OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE IS NO BASIS FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE RESTRAINING ORDER

In September 2009, the defendant was issued a Final Restraining Order by a Camden County Superior Court judge. The defendant’s mother had filed a domestic violence complaint, claiming he had stolen possessions from her and referred to her using offensive language. A temporary restraining order was issued.

The appeal argued whether the FRO could stand on the facts presented during the hearing. One factor in the appeal concerned the fact that theft is not one of the predicate acts under the N.J.S.A. 2C:25-19.
The Appellate Division ruled that one instance of offensive language does not provide a basis for a domestic violence restraining order. Also, the behavior of the defendant did not constitute harassment. The panel declared the FRO invalid based upon the facts presented at the hearing.

Legal Quote of the Week:

“All mothers, married or not, are affected by how the law treats married women with children.”

Edward J. McCaffrey, Taxing Women, 1997