The Supreme Court issued a request for comments to its proposed amendments to Rule 1:20-9 and Rule 1:28B-3 regarding the New Jersey Lawyers Assistance Program (NJLAP). The rules are aimed at facilitating third-party referrals by concerned colleagues to NJLAP consistent with the practice of many other jurisdictions.
With respect to R. 1:20-9, Confidentiality; Access to and Dissemination of Disciplinary Information, the recommendations for amendments include adding that when an investigation instituted by the Office of Attorney Ethics reveals reasonable cause to believe that a respondent may benefit from NJLAP services, the OAE Director may make a referral to NJLAP. It also permits NJLAP to contact the attorney. A further recommendation to R. 1:28B-3 would make such referrals confidential and permits NJLAP to receive and act on such referrals.
“Current Court Rules enable attorneys to seek help directly from the NJLAP but do not permit a concerned colleague, judge, family member, friend or court staff to initiate a confidential referral in order to establish a prompt connection between the NJLAP and the law professional potentially in need of help,” said the Supreme Court in its Notice to the Bar.
NJLAP is a free and confidential resource available to every New Jersey lawyer, judge, law student and law graduates. Its services include counseling for alcohol and substance use, depression, stress and anxiety, gambling and many other concerns. Additionally, it offers wellness and well-being services.
Court Revises Protocol for Emergent Electronic Monitoring Alert
The Supreme Court issued Directive #18-23 to remove the requirement to seek an emergent bench warrant for an emergent electronic monitoring alert. The directive supersedes prior Directive #15-19.
N.J.S.A. 2C:29-9 sets forth a violation of a home detention order, with or without electronic monitoring, as a standalone chargeable crime or offense. Pretrial Services Program staff is directed that if it receives one or more of the four types of emergent electronic monitoring alerts, that they must immediately execute the steps set forth in the revised protocol issued within Directive #18-23. There are four steps:
- Staff must investigate the alert to ensure it was not in error;
- Staff must contact the appropriate law enforcement agency as soon as possible that the emergent electronic monitoring alert was triggered;
- Staff must immediately document their findings in the Pretrial Monitoring System and complete a form contained within the directive. A Violation of Monitoring (VOM) must be filed by the next business day and if the defendant was arrested and the state has filed a Motion for Pretrial Detention on new charges or a Motion to Revoke Release, then the VOM must be scheduled no later than 10 business days after the filing;
- Staff need to assist law enforcement officials attempting to locate and arrest a defendant who violates electronic monitoring by providing them with any updated location information that is available in the monitoring application and to promptly document any follow-up conversation.
The directive, issued on Oct. 10, became effective immediately. A full copy can be found at njcourts.gov.
This is a status report provided by the New Jersey State Bar Association on recently passed and pending legislation, regulations, gubernatorial nominations and/or appointments of interest to lawyers, as well as the involvement of the NJSBA as amicus in appellate court matters. To learn more, visit njsba.com.