Atlantic County NJ Judge Criticizes NJ Gun Laws

[Bellasdaddy 31]

This is a must read and watch the video if you can.

 

He saysdoes NJ want to be known as the "Gotcha State?"

 

http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/eedition/news/judge-criticizes-gun-law-guides/article_8561b742-060c-5fc0-ac66-927ced9e1185.html?mode=jqm

[oneshot 45]

It already is

[revenger 473]

The judge goes on to say that there should be billboards advising people that guns are not allowed in NJ,  I see 2 problems with that,  The first being it would have be written in Russian or Chinese  and the second is that Americans don't need billboards telling them what rights are allowed there already is a document telling us them!!! 

[Old Glock guy 1,127]

New Jersey should have signs at its borders reading, "Abandon Second Amendment rights, all ye who enter here."

[maintenanceguy 510]

[Princetonian58 53]

I read the article. The judge clearly implied that he'd give Allen probation if Nappen were to plead her out. I am disturbed by the comment that Nappen is associated with "the cause" and that may be leading to prosecutors and trial judges to dig in and play hardball on his cases so as not to be viewed as being beat or handled by Nappen's firm.

 

A person's right to a fair and just disposition of criminal charges, irrespective of the fairness of the law, should in no measure depend upon who one has retained as counsel let alone the politics of counsel. INMHO Judge Donio has tipped his hand to show bias and Allen/Nappen should consider recusal.

[Bellasdaddy 31]

The article does not accurately report what the judge stated.  I am looking for the video to post but if you can find it, it is worth a view.  He basically blames the AG and says his hands are tied by the law and wishes the legislators would correct the law because the laws were not written for the types of folks that are being lumped together with criminals that use firearms to commit crimes or possess during the commission of a crime.

[PeteF 1,044]

I read the article. The judge clearly implied that he'd give Allen probation if Nappen were to plead her out. I am disturbed by the comment that Nappen is associated with "the cause" and that may be leading to prosecutors and trial judges to dig in and play hardball on his cases so as not to be viewed as being beat or handled by Nappen's firm.

A person's right to a fair and just disposition of criminal charges, irrespective of the fairness of the law, should in no measure depend upon who one has retained as counsel let alone the politics of counsel. INMHO Judge Donio has tipped his hand to show bias and Allen/Nappen should consider recusal.

Probation is no good either. Conviction leads to forfeiting right to own a firearm.

PTI is what would be called for but the DB persecuter and judge rejected that.

[Oakridgefirearms 224]

I read the article. The judge clearly implied that he'd give Allen probation if Nappen were to plead her out. I am disturbed by the comment that Nappen is associated with "the cause" and that may be leading to prosecutors and trial judges to dig in and play hardball on his cases so as not to be viewed as being beat or handled by Nappen's firm.

 

A person's right to a fair and just disposition of criminal charges, irrespective of the fairness of the law, should in no measure depend upon who one has retained as counsel let alone the politics of counsel. INMHO Judge Donio has tipped his hand to show bias and Allen/Nappen should consider recusal.

Digging in on this case is totally foolish on the prosecutor's part. No one is looking at this defendant as a danger to society. If she gets any (additional) jail time this case is very likely going to force some sort of change in the carry laws, either in NJ or on the national level. This will blow up in the face of the anti gunners, and make her the poster child for much needed reform or federal reciprocity.

[HBecwithFn7 296]

Digging in on this case is totally foolish on the prosecutor's part. No one is looking at this defendant as a danger to society. If she gets any (additional) jail time this case is very likely going to force some sort of change in the carry laws, either in NJ or on the national level. This will blow up in the face of the anti gunners, and make her the poster child for much needed reform or federal reciprocity.

 

Yep, she'll be be a martyr... the modern day "Joan of Arc" of the 2nd amendment.  Still, it would suck for her, personally.  I hope they change their mind in time. Failing that, I hope she gets off at trial, or the jury "does the right thing..."

[illy 1]

I spoke to former judge about this today (strongly pro 2A).

He said when it comes to guns, trial court judges' hands are tied by the Graves Act and the AG's directives (issued 2008).

He said it's so bad that dismissals, PTI and waivers (or even reductions) of the mandatory minimum are presumptively prohibited.

If a judge sentences someone to probation or prison time less than the minimum without the prosecutor or AG's consent, the prosecutor HAS to move for a stay of the sentence and file an appeal.

 

In other words, when it comes to guns, the judge has to ask the prosecutor permission to exercise any discretion.

Totally effin backwards.

 

He also said the NJ's only hope (for carry, ending the AWB, etc.) is Federal legislation. Short of that, nothing is going change for the better.

[PeteF 1,044]

Alpo, you just confused the crap out of me.

Judges are constrained by AG decisions? AG is top Law enforcement, not judicial. NJSC rulings and written law would be the directing force for judges, I would think.

 

I've always thought that a prosecutor can make any deal he wants but it is up to the judge to ACCEPT the deal to make it binding. Am I mistaken or does your judge friend have this completely backwards?

[djg0770 481]

 

 

Should read "Entering a Second Amendment SUSPENSION Zone"

[illy 1]

Alpo, you just confused the crap out of me.

Judges are constrained by AG decisions? AG is top Law enforcement, not judicial. NJSC rulings and written law would be the directing force for judges, I would think.

 

I've always thought that a prosecutor can make any deal he wants but it is up to the judge to ACCEPT the deal to make it binding. Am I mistaken or does your judge friend have this completely backwards?

No, that's how the Graves Act works:

No judicial discretion. Only the prosecutor or AG can make a motion for anything less than the mandatory minimum.

And that motion has to get reviewed by the Assignment Judge (top judge in the county).

 

The AG's directives aren't binding on the Court, BUT, since the law already puts all discretion in the prosecutor/AG's hands, the 2008 directive means that no one is getting any kind of break in a gun case.

[illy 1]

Here's the link to the AG's directive:

http://www.state.nj.us/lps/dcj/agguide/pdfs/Graves-Act-Oct23-2008.pdf

[illy 1]

And here's the section of the Graves Act that describes the procedure for reducing the mandatory minimum:

 

2C:43-6.2. Probation; reduction of mandatory minimum term
1. On a motion by the prosecutor made to the assignment judge that the imposition of a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment under (a) subsection c. of N.J.S.2C:43-6 for a defendant who has not previously been convicted of an offense under that subsection, or (b) subsection e. of N.J.S.2C:39-10 for a defendant who has not previously been convicted of an offense under chapter 39 of Title 2C of the New Jersey Statutes, does not serve the interests of justice, the assignment judge shall place the defendant on probation pursuant to paragraph (2) of subsection b. of N.J.S.2C:43-2 or reduce to one year the mandatory minimum term of imprisonment during which the defendant will be ineligible for parole. The sentencing court may also refer a case of a defendant who has not previously been convicted of an offense under that subsection to the assignment judge, with the approval of the prosecutor, if the sentencing court believes that the interests of justice would not be served by the imposition of a mandatory minimum term.

 

So yeah, totally backwards.

Of course in NJ it almost doesn't matter, since the courts are just as anti-2A as the AG/County Prosecutors.

[kman 56]

The Graves Act is unconstitutional as an overbroad infringement on bearing arms and is also cruel and unusual punishment. Unconstitutional. The judges and prosecutors swore oaths to uphold the constitution. Rather than complaining about all of the outrageous requirements of the Graves Act, they ought to disregard these requirements as being null and void being gross violations of the Bill of Rights. It is perplexing that they do not even consider such a way of dealing with this.

 

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

 

 

[Midwest 28]

The Graves Act is unconstitutional as an overbroad infringement on bearing arms and is also cruel and unusual punishment. Unconstitutional. The judges and prosecutors swore oaths to uphold the constitution. Rather than complaining about all of the outrageous requirements of the Graves Act, they ought to disregard these requirements as being null and void being gross violations of the Bill of Rights. It is perplexing that they do not even consider such a way of dealing with this.

 

 

Has there ever been any effort to have the Graves Act overturned or challenged?

 

 

I saw the Graves Act mentioned while looking at a story  regarding the possession of a BB gun in NJ. It was a national story back in December 2013. 

 

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/12/10/bb-gun-control-in-new-jersey-kids-rite-passage-could-mean-felony/

 

 

“In all honesty, kids who are charged are looking at mandatory jail time,” said New Jersey attorney William Proetta, adding that under the state’s Graves Act, a conviction could lead to prison time. “The only defense is to request a waiver but if that’s not granted, young kids can get a felony charge and their lives are basically over.”

[Fawkesguy 57]

Digging in on this case is totally foolish on the prosecutor's part. No one is looking at this defendant as a danger to society. If she gets any (additional) jail time this case is very likely going to force some sort of change in the carry laws, either in NJ or on the national level. This will blow up in the face of the anti gunners, and make her the poster child for much needed reform or federal reciprocity.

 

Nah, it isn't going to force a change in anything, and nothing is going to "blow up" in the face of the antis.  She'll just go to jail and do her time.

 

For the rest of us? Status quo until Christie is out of office.  Then it gets MUCH worse.