The state Appellate Division accepted the New Jersey State Bar Association’s (NJSBA) amicus brief in State v. Gomes (A-3477-20). The case concerns the question of whether a person who has previously participated in pretrial intervention (PTI) for an offense now expungable due to the passage of the Cannabis Regulatory, Enforcement Assistance, and Marketplace Modernization Act (CREAMMA) is again eligible for PTI services.
Arguing clear legislative intent, the NJSBA said individuals who received PTI for a now-expungable marijuana offense should not be precluded from a future PTI, as a result of the statute barring more than one admittance to the program. There are four cases being considered by the Appellate Division highlighting the lack of uniformity in the interpretation of CREAMMA and the PTI statute, and issue the NJSBA further highlighted. Criminal Law Section’s Chair-Elect Michael Roberts wrote the brief.
Supreme Court’s Announcement to Leave Vacant Seats on the Court Sparks Call for Justice for New Jersey Citizens
Reiterating the NJSBA’s call to Gov. Phil Murphy and legislative leaders to fill judicial vacancies, NJSBA President Domenick Carmagnola issued a strong statement urging stakeholders to diligently nominate candidates to the bench as soon as possible because New Jersey has “too many people waiting for justice.”
“In light of New Jersey Supreme Court Justice Stuart Rabner’s announcement that he will not fill a second vacancy on the high court left as a result of Justice Faustino J. Fernandez-Vina’s retirement, the NJSBA urges that the Governor nominate candidates to the bench as soon as possible and work diligently with legislatures to ensure the successful confirmation of each, in a way the framers of our Constitution intended,” he said.
Justice Rabner issued a statement on Thursday that he would not temporarily assign anyone to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court, citing the tradition that no more than four members of the Supreme Court be affiliated with a single political party.
Citing to a waning bench, Carmagnola underscored the significant impact on litigants looking for their day in court mean that “staggering backlogs and too many people waiting for justice.”