Conviction reversed where court excluded character evidence
State v Mahoney
___ NJ Super. ___ 868 A. 2d 1171
(App. Div., A-3364-02T2 decide March 17, 2005).
Defendant is an attorney who was tried before a jury and convicted of third-degree theft by failure to make required disposition of property; third-degree misapplication of entrusted property; and two counts of third-degree forgery. The conviction for theft was based on defendant's delay in disbursing to his clients proceeds from a settlement of a wrongful-death case. With respect to the forgery conviction, the state presented evidence that defendant endorsed and deposited the three-party settlement check without his clients' authorization. The prosecutor denied defendant's application to enter pretrial intervention (PTI) and, on appeal from the prosecutor's denial, the trial court affirmed. Relying on PTI Guideline 3(i), as codified in Rule 3:28, the prosecutor concluded that, as a licensed attorney, defendant was presumptively ineligible to participate in PTI because he was charged with committing crimes that involved a breach of the public trust.
The Appellate Division reversed the convictions. They concluded that the trial court improperly excluded substantial portions of proffered testimony by defendant's character witnesses. The trial court erroneously prevented these witnesses from testifying abut defendant's character traits as an attorney, and improperly barred them from testifying about the specific experiences they had with defendant that formed the basis for their opinions. The trial court also improperly submitted to the jury the full test of Rule 1:21-6. The error here involved the court's failure to provide instructions to the jury on how to consider and apply the rule's directives to the facts of this criminal case. The court also reversed based on the prosecutor's improper remarks during summation.
The Appellate Division court affirmed, the trial court's denial of defendant's PTI application. Although defendant's status as a lawyer does not operate as a per se impediment for consideration for enrollment into PTI, we are satisfied that the trial court correctly determined that defendant failed to show that the prosecutor's application of the presumption of ineligibility articulated in Guideline 3(i)(4) constituted a patent abuse of discretion.
Hire a Trial Attorney To Represent You If Charged With a Criminal Or Serious Motor Vehicle Matter Kenneth Vercammen's Law office represents individuals charged with criminal, drug offenses, and serious traffic violations throughout New Jersey. Our office also helps people with traffic/municipal court tickets including drivers charged with Driving While Intoxicated, Refusal and Driving While Suspended. Criminal and Motor vehicle violations can cost you. You may have to pay high fines in court or receive points on your drivers license. An accumulation of too many points, or certain moving violations may require you to pay expensive surcharges to the N.J. DMV/MVC [Motor Vehicle Commission] or have your license suspended. Don't give up!
The Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen can provide experienced attorney representation for criminal and motor vehicle violations. When your job or driver's license is in jeopardy or you are facing thousands of dollars in fines, DMV/MVC surcharges and car insurance increases, you need excellent legal representation. The least expensive attorney is not always the answer. Schedule a free in-office consultation if you need experienced legal representation in a traffic/municipal court matter.
Our website KennethVercammen.com provides information on traffic offenses we can be retained to represent people. Our website also provides details on jail terms for traffic violations and car insurance eligibility points. Car insurance companies increase rates or drop customers based on moving violations. Call the Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen at 732-572-0500 to schedule a free in-office consultation to hire a trial attorney for Criminal/ DWI/ Municipal Court Traffic/ Drug offenses.
State v Mahoney
___ NJ Super. ___ 868 A. 2d 1171
(App. Div., A-3364-02T2 decide March 17, 2005).
Defendant is an attorney who was tried before a jury and convicted of third-degree theft by failure to make required disposition of property; third-degree misapplication of entrusted property; and two counts of third-degree forgery. The conviction for theft was based on defendant's delay in disbursing to his clients proceeds from a settlement of a wrongful-death case. With respect to the forgery conviction, the state presented evidence that defendant endorsed and deposited the three-party settlement check without his clients' authorization. The prosecutor denied defendant's application to enter pretrial intervention (PTI) and, on appeal from the prosecutor's denial, the trial court affirmed. Relying on PTI Guideline 3(i), as codified in Rule 3:28, the prosecutor concluded that, as a licensed attorney, defendant was presumptively ineligible to participate in PTI because he was charged with committing crimes that involved a breach of the public trust.
The Appellate Division reversed the convictions. They concluded that the trial court improperly excluded substantial portions of proffered testimony by defendant's character witnesses. The trial court erroneously prevented these witnesses from testifying abut defendant's character traits as an attorney, and improperly barred them from testifying about the specific experiences they had with defendant that formed the basis for their opinions. The trial court also improperly submitted to the jury the full test of Rule 1:21-6. The error here involved the court's failure to provide instructions to the jury on how to consider and apply the rule's directives to the facts of this criminal case. The court also reversed based on the prosecutor's improper remarks during summation.
The Appellate Division court affirmed, the trial court's denial of defendant's PTI application. Although defendant's status as a lawyer does not operate as a per se impediment for consideration for enrollment into PTI, we are satisfied that the trial court correctly determined that defendant failed to show that the prosecutor's application of the presumption of ineligibility articulated in Guideline 3(i)(4) constituted a patent abuse of discretion.
Hire a Trial Attorney To Represent You If Charged With a Criminal Or Serious Motor Vehicle Matter Kenneth Vercammen's Law office represents individuals charged with criminal, drug offenses, and serious traffic violations throughout New Jersey. Our office also helps people with traffic/municipal court tickets including drivers charged with Driving While Intoxicated, Refusal and Driving While Suspended. Criminal and Motor vehicle violations can cost you. You may have to pay high fines in court or receive points on your drivers license. An accumulation of too many points, or certain moving violations may require you to pay expensive surcharges to the N.J. DMV/MVC [Motor Vehicle Commission] or have your license suspended. Don't give up!
The Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen can provide experienced attorney representation for criminal and motor vehicle violations. When your job or driver's license is in jeopardy or you are facing thousands of dollars in fines, DMV/MVC surcharges and car insurance increases, you need excellent legal representation. The least expensive attorney is not always the answer. Schedule a free in-office consultation if you need experienced legal representation in a traffic/municipal court matter.
Our website KennethVercammen.com provides information on traffic offenses we can be retained to represent people. Our website also provides details on jail terms for traffic violations and car insurance eligibility points. Car insurance companies increase rates or drop customers based on moving violations. Call the Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen at 732-572-0500 to schedule a free in-office consultation to hire a trial attorney for Criminal/ DWI/ Municipal Court Traffic/ Drug offenses.
