New Jersey Criminal Defense Law Blog : New Jersey Criminal Defense Lawyer & Attorney : John Marshall Law Firm : Drug Crimes, Domestic Violence : Monmouth, Middlesex & Union Counties

Today, I received another telephone call from an individual who attempted to defend a simple assault charge on his own. The result was a conviction for simple assault in accordance with N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1. The man was extremely concerned about the impact the criminal record would have on his employment, as well as his immigration status. We are going to file an application for post-conviction relief to vacate the conviction and, if that fails, an appeal is contemplated.

In accordance with N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1, an individual may be found guilty of "simple assault" in New Jersey under any of three scenarios. The first situation is where an individual attempts to cause or recklessly, knowingly, or purposely causes bodily injury to another. The second scenario is where bodily injury is negligently caused with a deadly weapon. The third and final setting is where an individual attempts to put another in fear of serious bodily injury through physical menace. Simple assault is a disorderly persons offense except where it is the result of a fight by mutual consent, in which case it is a petty disorderly persons offense.

The error made by the individual who retained our office today was in attempting to defend himself. He candidly had no business playing around where the potential ramifications were so significant; unless or until we vacate the simple assault conviction, he shall possess a criminal record. There is little doubt in my mind that this outcome would have been avoided had we represented him. I think that the situation represents a perfect example of how individuals make the mistake of believing that a charge like simple assault does not require an attorney by virtue of not thinking through about what the potential ramifications shall be if they are convicted. It really is not worth the risk in my view given the marginal expense of hiring NJ Simple Assault Lawyers. I am certain that this individual will not make the same mistake again.

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Star Ledger published a brief article Thursday regarding a Simple Assault committed by a Roselle High School student.  The incident offers an interesting example as to how a NJ Simple Assault Charge can be transformed into a much more serious offense of Aggravated Assault when the victim involves a member of a protected class of individuals.  A protected class not only includes police officers and other law enforcement, but other members of the public who the law deems necessary to protect for public policy reasons.  Let me explain this dynamic.

A simple assault is basically any form of unwanted or offensive "touching" of another which causes some element of bodily injury.  This can include momentary pain or discomfort, and need not be lasting or leave residual injury.  A simple assault is transformed under N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1(b) into an aggravated assault when one of the following is the victim: (1) a police officer; (2) fireman or first aid work acting in the course of their duties; (3) teachers, school officials and bus drivers; (4) DYFS workers; and (5) a judge. The escalation of a simple assault to an aggravated assault offense is significant as it triggers an indictable felony charge of the Fourth Degree or even Third Degree.  An individual is exposed to not only a lasting criminal record when this occurs but also up to 18 months in jail for a Fourth Degree conviction, and up to 5 years in jail for a Third Degree.

Our NJ Aggravated Assault Defense Attorneys do their very best to make sure that simple assaults like the one in Roselle never make it to a Superior Court like Union County Superior Court.  If there is no real injury and the defendant does not have a history of this type of behavior, we are typically successful in persuading the prosecutor to remand the case as a NJ Simple Assault charge. We will have to see if the Union County Prosecutor picks up this case as an Aggravated Assault.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

On November 18, 2008, the Appellate Division issued its decision in State v. Stull.  The case involved the appeal of a Simple Assault conviction under N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1.  The defendant was a Hamilton police officer who had become involved in a physical altercation at a high school sporting event.  Apparently, the defendant's wife and another women were in an argument and, when he separated the two, the son of the women involved, got involved with the defendant.  It culminated in defendant placing the boy in a headlock for a short period.  No blows were exchanged.

The officer ended up losing his job and pension as a result of the conviction and appealed. The basis for the appeal was the fact that Simple Assault had not been established as there was no "bodily injury" to the boy as required under N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1.  The Appellate Division was not persuaded by the argument, concluding that a headlock is enough to cause "bodily injury" insofar as all this term contemplates is some element of pain or physical discomfort.

The lesson to be learned from this decision is told-fold in my mind.  First, it illustrates just how serious the repercussions of a simple assault conviction can be in terms of employment.  It can limit an individuals ability to get a job and even result in discharge. Second, the decision reinforces the fact that there are rarely "do overs" once there is a bad result in a municipal court case.  There typically is only one bite at the apple so an experienced defense attorney is an absolute necessity for anyone viewing a simple assault offense seriously. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

A disorderly persons offense (DP) in New Jersey is a petty offense that is handled in municipal court. These types of offenses include simple assault and harassment. In the recent case of Housing and Redev. Auth. of Twp. of Franklin v. Miller, A-2463-06, the court held that a tenant may be evicted from federally subsidized public housing upon conviction for a disorderly persons offense. The court held that a statute allowing eviction for "criminal activity" (known as the one-strike law) should be read broadly, consistent with its purpose of making public housing safe. Therefore, Judge Donald Coburn's panel found no intention by Congress to exclude petty offenses from the "criminal activity" that justifies eviction. A Somerset County Superior Court judge found that the housing authority was within its rights to terminate the lease under 42 U.S.C.A. 1437d(1)(6), which requires that leases of federally subsidized housing provide that "any criminal activity that threatens the health, safety, or right to peaceful enjoyment of the premises by other tenants or any drug related criminal activity on or off such premises, engaged in by a public household tenant, any member of the person's household, or any guest or other person under the tenant's control, shall be good cause for termination of the tenancy." On appeal, the judges agreed that a DP offense was included in criminal activity sufficient to warrant eviction.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link