Sponsored by:
Assemblyman RAJ MUKHERJI
District 33 (Hudson)
Assemblywoman SHAVONDA E. SUMTER
District 35 (Bergen and Passaic)
Assemblyman ADAM J. TALIAFERRO
District 3 (Cumberland, Gloucester and Salem)
Co-Sponsored by:
Assemblywoman Reynolds-Jackson
SYNOPSIS
Provides that municipal prosecutor may use mail or email to engage in discussions and negotiations with defendants concerning plea bargains for certain traffic offenses.
CURRENT VERSION OF TEXT
As introduced.
An Act concerning plea bargaining in municipal court and amending P.L.2000, c.75.
Be It Enacted by the Senate and General Assembly of the State of New Jersey:
1. Section 2 of P.L.2000, c.75 (C.2B:25-11) is amended to read as follows:
2. a. In accordance with the Rules of Court adopted by the Supreme Court of New Jersey, a municipal prosecutor may recommend to the court to accept a plea to a lesser or other offense.
b. (1) Except as set forth in paragraph (2) of this subsection or as otherwise provided by the Rules of Court, in a case where the defendant is charged with a violation of a provision of Title 39 of the Revised Statutes the municipal prosecutor may use mail or email to engage in discussions and negotiations with the defendant or the defendant’s attorney concerning a plea by the defendant to a lesser or other offense. The municipal prosecutor may also use mail or email to relay to the defendant or his attorney the prosecutor’s final determination as to whether he will recommend that the court accept any such plea.
(2) The municipal prosecutor shall not use mail or email as provided in paragraph (1) of this subsection in any case where the defendant is charged with a violation of any of the following: section 5 of P.L.1990, c.10 (C.39:3-10.13); section 16 of P.L.1990, c.10 (C.39:3-10.24); R.S.39:3-40; R.S.39:4-50; section 2 of P.L.1981, c.512 (C.39:4-50.4a); section 1 of P.L.1999, c.410 (C.39:4-50.15); section 4 of P.L.1999, c.417 (C.39:4-50.19); section 1 of P.L.2007, c.78 (C.39:4-80.1); section 1 of P.L.1942, c.192 (C.39:4-128.1); or section 3 of P.L.1952, c.157 (C.12:7-46).
c. Nothing in this section shall be construed to alter or limit the authority or discretion of the Supreme Court to regulate the practice of plea agreements in municipal court, or to alter or limit the authority or discretion of a prosecutor.
(cf: P.L.2000, c.75, s.2)
2. This act shall take effect on the 60th day following enactment.
STATEMENT
This bill would allow the municipal prosecutor to use mail or email to engage in discussions and negotiations with defendants concerning plea bargains for certain traffic offenses.
Under current law, in accordance with the Rules of Court adopted by the Supreme Court of New Jersey, a municipal prosecutor may recommend to the municipal court to accept a plea to a lesser or other offense, and may move before the municipal court to amend the original charge.
The bill provides that in a case where the defendant is charged with a traffic offense pursuant to Title 39 of the Revised Statutes, except for certain enumerated offenses, or as otherwise provided by Court Rule, the municipal prosecutor may use mail or email to engage in discussions and negotiations with the defendant or the defendant’s attorney concerning a plea by the defendant to a lesser or other offense. The municipal prosecutor could also use mail or email to relay the prosecutor’s final determination as to whether he will recommend that the court accept any such plea.
The bill would not apply to the following enumerated offenses:
- section 5 of P.L.1990, c.10 (C.39:3-10.13) (operating commercial motor vehicle with alcohol concentration of 0.04% or more, or while under the influence of a controlled substance) ;
- section 16 of P.L.1990, c.10 (C.39:3-10.24) (operator of commercial motor vehicle refusing a breath test);
- R.S.39:3-40 (operating motor vehicle while driver’s license is suspended or revoked);
- R.S.39:4-50 (driving under the influence);
- section 2 of P.L.1981, c.512 (C.39:4-50.4a) (refusal to submit to breath test);
- section 1 of P.L.1999, c.410 (C.39:4-50.15) (driving under the influence with passenger who is a minor);
- section 4 of P.L.1999, c.417 (C.39:4-50.19) (failure to install court-ordered ignition interlock device);
- section 1 of P.L.2007, c.78 (C.39:4-80.1) (failure to comply with school crossing guard’s signal to stop);
- section 1 of P.L.1942, c.192 (C.39:4-128.1) (unlawfully passing a stopped school bus); or
- section 3 of P.L.1952, c.157 (C.12:7-46) (operating a vessel while under the influence).
The bill specifies that it shall not be construed to alter or limit the authority or discretion of the Supreme Court to regulate the practice of plea agreements in municipal court, or to alter or limit the authority or discretion of a prosecutor..