Term researched: Revocation and Termination
Legal citation: 356 N.J. Super. 299; 812 A.2d 409; 2002 N.J.
Legal history: the defendant had been indicted for receiving stolen properties in violation to the New Jersey state acts 2C:20-7a. He was also found guilty of theft by deception and placed on a three-year period of probation. While serving probation, Thomas was convicted of two other criminal offences. Besides, he pleaded guilty of handling stolen property and the charge of harassment. However, two weeks after his second sentencing, it was decided that a revocation and sentencing on the probation violations should occur. The court ruled that the Thomas be charged simultaneously for the two mistakes he did while under probation. The defendant argues that the New Jersey courts did not have sufficient jurisdictions over the violations of probations since no one had advanced any proceedings until after his probationary period had expired. Thomas appalled the decision to the superior courts in New Jersey. The appellant court granted certification and reversed the revocations of defendant probation ("Findlaw's Superior Court Of New Jersey, Appellate Division Case And Opinions.").
Facts: Thomas was involved in two counts of probation violations after being found guilty of theft handling stolen property and the charge of harassment. However, charges in these two cases of probation violations were commenced after the probation period had elapsed.
Legal issues: Did the trial court lack jurisdiction to revoke punishment because probationary period had long expired?
Did the appellant court have the power to terminate any criminal proceeding and sentence because the sentence was excessive based on the fact that the state had delayed commencing any revocation proceedings?
Decision: Both the New Jersey State and Thomas wins. The court ruled that the trial court had jurisdiction to initiate proceedings. However, the appellant court reduced the charge to the presumptive term of four years. The court also reversed the revocation of Thomas probation and vacated all accompanying sentences.
Legal reasoning: a charge of a probation violation is not a criminal offence. Therefore, the court lacked jurisdiction to commence any indictment and trial by the New Jersey court. However, any charge of violation of probation may result in loss of liberty. Hence, the defendant was sentenced to four years in prison.
Personal analysis: I agree with the appellant Courts decision that a charge of a probation violation is not a criminal offence. However, any charges against a person under probation should be dealt according to the existing laws. Thus, a person has no legal authority to escape penalty since they are serving probation. The defendant’s argument was vague and only meant escape criminal liability for his actions.
Work cited
Findlaw's Superior Court Of New Jersey, Appellate Division Case And Opinions.. Findlaw. N.p., 2016. Web. 3 Apr. 2016.
