Bill to Establish Central Drug Courts for Municipalities Passes Committee
A representative for the Administrative Office of the New Jersey Courts testified that, while her office has no official position on the bill, it did have concerns over jurisdiction, administration and expenses.
November 08, 2019 at 09:30 AM
5 minute read
A bill to give New Jersey counties the authority to establish a central municipal drug court passed the Assembly Law and Public Safety Committee on Thursday in Trenton, but not without requests by the committee chairman to tweak the measure further.
Sponsors say A-5234 will help alleviate the backlog of minor drug offenses in the state's court system by providing an alternative method for trying such cases and sentencing offenders, including juveniles. They say it may even help reduce repeat offenses and lower court costs.
But a representative for the Administrative Office of the New Jersey Courts testified that while her office has no official position on the bill, it did have concerns over jurisdiction, administration and expenses that the new program would entail, including setup and staffing.
The Assembly Law and Public Safety Committee—meeting fresh off Tuesday's elections in which Democrats, despite losing a few seats, maintained sizable majorities in both chambers—approved the bill by a 5-0 vote with four members absent.
Voting for the bill were Committee Chair Adam Taliaferro, D-Gloucester, Nancy Pinkin, D-Middlesex, Shavonda Sumter, D-Bergen, Lisa Swain, D-Bergen, and Serena DiMaso, R-Monmouth.
A-5234 is sponsored by Assembly Members Thomas Giblin, D-Essex, Patricia Egan Jones, D-Camden, and Ralph Caputo, D-Bergen.
The central municipal drug courts authorized under the bill would be given the jurisdiction to hear cases involving crimes of the fourth degree, disorderly persons offenses or petty disorderly persons offenses related to controlled dangerous substances, according to the bill's sponsors.
"Affording counties the choice to establish municipal drug courts that specifically deal with minor drug-related offenses creates room for a more expeditious and fair judicial process," said Giblin in a statement following the committee vote. "Right now, many of our local courts are overwhelmed by the number of cases on their docket and creating a central court will help lift the burden."
The legislation would amend N.J.S.A 2B:12-1 to read: "Any county may establish, by ordinance, a central municipal drug court, which shall be an inferior court of limited jurisdiction, to adjudicate cases within its jurisdiction and cases referred by the vicinage Assignment Judge pursuant to the Rules of Court, and provide for its administration. A copy of that ordinance shall be filed with the Administrative Director of the Courts. As used in this act, 'municipal court' includes a central municipal drug court."
The bill also provides for the appointment of judges to a central drug court by the normal advise-and-consent process, adding, "In those counties having a county executive, the county executive may submit the names of judicial candidates for judge of the central municipal drug court to the Governor. In all other counties, the governing body may submit the names of judicial candidates for judge of the central municipal drug court to the Governor."
It also provides that:
- The presiding judge of the Family Part of the Superior Court for the vicinage in which a central municipal drug court is established, would refer juveniles for sentencing;
- The drug court could employ an attorney as a prosecutor under the supervision of the Office of the Attorney General or county prosecutor to represent the state, county or municipality, as well as attorneys on a full-time, part-time or per-case basis to represent those entitled to appointed counsel;
- Community service and drug treatment programs would be options for sentencing, in lieu of jail time.
"Incarceration cannot be the only answer," said Egan Jones in the same release. "By supporting sentencing alternatives that divert certain offenders into drug treatment programs, this bill helps rehabilitate people with severe drug dependencies and has a potent effect in helping reduce crime rates and recidivism."
Failure to comply with the court-ordered community service or drug treatment program would be reported to the court and could potentially result in the revocation of its order and imposition of new sentencing, according to the measure.
"We are acknowledging that, when it comes to certain crimes committed under the influence, there are more effective sentencing options to employ," Caputo said. "The reality is addiction doesn't end behind bars and, by getting people the help they need to stay clean through community-based treatment programs, we're reducing the cost of New Jersey's criminal justice system."
Alyson R. Jones, an attorney who is the legislative liaison for the AOC, was the only person to testify before the committee on Thursday. She said the AOC had no position on the bill but had concerns—not the least, funding.
"This is a program that does require a significant amount of funding to go with it," Jones told lawmakers.
Pinkin, who had recently introduced a bill to require a training curriculum for judges and judicial staff on handling sexually violent offenses, raised concerns over whether those presiding over drug court will have the proper expertise.
"My concern is, will they have the expertise for these cases to perform drug court as it's currently performed?" said Pinkin at the hearing. "There are nuances to drug court, and you want to make sure those same nuances would be delivered effectively at the local level."
"I think it's a good idea, but I think there's some tweaks to be made," Taliaferro said afterward. "We heard some of those concerns today, and those concerns will be talked about with the sponsor and addressed, and hopefully, we will go forward with it."
Sen. Shirley Turner, D-Mercer, introduced S-2214, the identical Senate version of A-5234, on March 8, 2018, and it was referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee. No committee hearing has been scheduled yet for S-2214.
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
© 2025 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 AllRetiring AOC Director Judge Glenn A. Grant Walks Away From Judiciary 'Tremendously Impressed' by New Jersey's Judges
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Which Legal Tech Jobs Are on the Rise, and Which Aren't, with Jared Coseglia
- 2Absent Explicit Agreement, Court Rejects Unilateral Responsiveness Redaction of Text Messages
- 3SEC Whistleblower Program: What to Expect Under the Trump Administration
- 4Sidley Hires Paul Hastings Energy Finance Partner in Houston
- 5Potential Pitfalls in Arbitrating Religious Disputes
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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