Expansion of Public Defender Representation of Juveniles Gains Traction in Trenton
The lone abstention came from Assemblyman Erik Peterson, R-Hunterdon, a solo in Clinton and a municipal prosecutor, who said the bill in its current form needs to be tweaked.
March 05, 2020 at 07:03 PM
4 minute read
A bill that would extend automatic eligibility for legal representation by the Office of Public Defender for defendants under 18 cleared the New Jersey Assembly Law and Public Safety Committee on Thursday.
Sponsors say the measure is intended to provide additional protections for the state's juveniles during criminal proceedings.
A-2396 passed the committee by a 7-0 vote with one abstention.
The lone abstention came from Assemblyman Erik Peterson, R-Hunterdon, who expressed concerns that the bill would provide parents of teens with means the same access to OPD representation as indigent defendants and others with fewer resources.
Under current law, persons under 21 are eligible for representation by a public defender upon the court's review of the financial resources of parents or guardians.
A-2396 would apply to any person under 18 arrested or charged with an indictable offense or act of delinquency. That person would automatically be eligible, at no expense to him or her, for representation by the OPD.
"These kids need someone to advocate for them, but affordability and the fear of what a lawyer might cost often leads them and their family to forgo legal representation. Eliminating the constraints to appointing counsel would ensure the constitutional right remains intact," said prime sponsor Assemblyman Benjie Wimberly, D-Bergen, in a statement after the committee vote in Trenton.
The Senate version, S-896, previously passed the Senate Law and Public Safety Committee by a vote of 4-0 on Feb. 24, according to legislative records. S-896 now awaits the Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee approval before heading to the Senate floor for a full vote there.
"Today, a juvenile's right to a public defender is not a guarantee," said one of the Senate bill's prime sponsors, Sen. Nellie Pou, D-Bergen, in a statement. "Instead it's dependent on their guardian, their guardian's finances and their guardian's willingness to apply for OPD services."
"But what if their guardian is involved in the incident, what if the guardian has skin in the game, what if they aren't looking out for the juvenile, but themselves?" Pou added. "When a young person is indicted, their fate should not be influenced by anything but their own actions."
The same release alluded to a National Juvenile Defender Center statistic that 11 states currently provide every child accused of an offense with an attorney, regardless of financial status. If the New Jersey bill becomes law, the Garden State would become the 12th state.
But Peterson, a solo in Clinton and a municipal prosecutor, said the bill in its current form needs to be tweaked to eliminate the provision where finances aren't a consideration.
"The Public Defender's Office has always been based on the ability to pay for legal counsel," Peterson said. "This bill says you can still can get a Public Defender regardless of your ability to pay, and that's a change.
"New Jersey is expensive enough, and to expand spending money on people who can afford an attorney seems a bit much," added Peterson, who is also the Republican assistant whip. "I'd rather see us use resources of the Public Defender's Office for someone who doesn't have the ability to pay for an attorney than on rich kids whose parents decide they'll take a public defender and save a few bucks."
A-2396 now goes to the Assembly Speaker for further review.
If signed by the governor, the bill would go into effect on the first day of the fourth month afterward.
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 AllNJ Attorney General's Office Announces Major Shake-Up for Executive Leadership Team
4 minute read'Bewitched by the Technology': $300K to Settle Faulty Facial Recognition
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 3Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
- 4Greenberg Traurig Initiates String of Suits Following JPMorgan Chase's 'Infinite Money Glitch'
- 5It's Time Law Firms Were Upfront About Who Their Salaried Partners Are
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