Bill Would Upgrade Charge for Assaulting an Attorney
“Lawyers, who do not always have a choice over their clients, stand by people accused of violent crimes in what may be an incredibly stressful moment in their lives," the bill's sponsor, Assemblyman Vincent Mazzeo, said.
June 18, 2019 at 05:38 PM
4 minute read
Prompted by a recent violent attack on an Atlantic County assistant public defender by a client, a bill that would upgrade simple assault charges against a lawyer inside a criminal courtroom to aggravated assault, the same level as an assault on a law enforcement officer and certain public officials, was introduced in Trenton.
A-5589, sponsored by Atlantic County Democratic Assemblymen Vincent Mazzeo and John Armato, was introduced on June 13 and referred to the Assembly Law and Public Safety Committee.
Under the bill, the amendment to N.J.S. 2C:12-1 would apply to “any attorney in a criminal matter including but not limited to any public defender, assigned counsel, private attorney, prosecuting authority, or a member of the attorney's staff while clearly identifiable as being engaged in the performance of court related duties or, in the case of an attorney, because of his status as a member of the bar.”
A Senate version of the bill has yet to be introduced.
“We must make sure the attorneys who fight for justice every day receive justice themselves should they find themselves a victim of assault,” Mazzeo said in a statement.
The charge upgrade from simple assault to aggravated assault would apply to any violent behavior against an attorney while the attorney is performing court duties, or simply because of one's status as counsel.
It also elevates the punishment for attacks on lawyers to the same level as an assault on a law enforcement officer and certain public officials, such as judges, teachers, firemen and prison and public utility employees, among others.
Under current law, a simple assault committed against any attorney while he or she is engaging in courtroom responsibilities, or because of his or her status as a member of the bar, is a disorderly persons offense punishable by six months in prison, a fine of $1,000, or both.
Aggravated assault under the same circumstances would be a crime of the fourth degree, punishable by 18 months in prison and a fine of up to $10,000. It would be a crime of the third degree if the victim were injured, punishable by three to five years in prison and a fine of up to $15,000.
The legislation, according to Mazzeo's announcement, was prompted after an incident in an Atlantic County courtroom last month, in which an Atlantic County assistant public defender was attacked by her client, who had been accused of fatally stabbing his neighbor.
According to media reports, as the attorney spoke for her client at the hearing, her client became disruptive and insisted he did not want his counsel to represent him. After several verbal outbursts, the client lunged toward his attorney and pushed her across the room into a wall.
Following the courtroom scuffle, the client was charged with simple assault, which Mazzeo said prompted him and Armato to begin working with Atlantic County Prosecutor Damon Tyner to combat the issue of violence in the courtroom and ensure offenders are held accountable.
“Lawyers, who do not always have a choice over their clients, stand by people accused of violent crimes in what may be an incredibly stressful moment in their lives. Sometimes people don't handle the pressure well, and the attorney is caught in the crossfire,” Mazzeo said.
The bill statement said “the heightened risk of being targeted for attack in charged courtroom situations and in other settings” on attorneys was the impetus for the measure.
“Attorneys are not armed in the courtroom, nor do they receive training to defend themselves if they are attacked,” Armato said in the same release. “If they have a client who is prone to violence and receiving bad news from a judge, they may find themselves at risk.
“While we can't prevent every assault, we can hold assailants accountable for their actions,” Armato said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAppellate Div. Follows Fed Reasoning on Recusal for Legislator-Turned-Judge
4 minute readChiesa Shahinian Bolsters Corporate Practice With 5 From Newark Boutique
5 minute read'A Mockery' of Deposition Rules: Walgreens Wins Sanctions Dispute Over Corporate Witness Allegedly Unfamiliar With Company
Trending Stories
- 12 Federal Judges Rescind Senior Status After Trump Win. Might More Follow?
- 2Japan Highlights Burr & Forman Director's 'Body Of Work' With Highest Honor
- 3Unanswered Questions on Remote Work Complicate NJ Wage Transparency Law, Litigators Say
- 4DeSantis Appointed Assistant US Attorney to Broward Circuit Court Bench
- 5Thomson Reuters Plans to Spend Big in AI. Here’s How
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250