Record of Conviction for N.J.S.A. 2C:35-5 Is Eligible for Expungement.

Under new law, possession with intent to distribute is now expugnable after five years from the last day of probation or parole, if the petitioner can demonstrate to the court that it would be in the public interest, giving due consideration to the nature of the offense, and the applicant’s character and conduct since the conviction.

Further, a possession with intent to distribute can be expunged pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2C:52-2c(3), after five years, if the conviction was of a fourth or three degree offense.

However, this change in the law does not change the prior law which prohibits, and bars, an Expungement for anyone who has two separate convictions, including a disorderly person’s offense. 

Many people who qualify for this Expungement are unaware of this opportunity to expunge their criminal record, and get a fresh start.

For more information regarding your rights to expunge a criminal record you are invited to call the Law Office of Vincent J. Sanzone, Jr., Esq.

The following information blog is for information purposes only and does not constitute legal advise for anyone particular individual since a various factors will determine whether anyone applicant/petitioner will qualify for the Expungement of a criminal conviction.

Law Office of Vincent J. Sanzone, Jr.

Elizabeth, N.J.

NJ Criminal Defense Attorney, Elizabeth Criminal Defense Lawyer, NJ Expungement Lawyers

CriminalDefenseNJ.com

Tel. No. (908) 354-7006

Elizabeth, New Jersey

November 30, 2011

City of Elizabeth Hit with 1.5 Million Dollar Verdict in Civil Rights Suit in Federal Court, Police Department Needs to Reform Internal Affairs Unit.

A federal jury held that Elizabeth Police Officer David Conrad acted wantonly and/or maliciously when he assaulted and pistol whipped an arrestee, Therman Brown.  

Two other police officer Athanasios Mikros and Vincent Flatley were also named in the lawsuit.  In the 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights law suit all three police officers were alleged to have filed false police reports. 

Similar to the majority of New Jersey Police Departments the internal affairs investigation regarding the Brown assault was whitewashed by the Elizabeth Internal Affairs Unit, and ruled by the internal affairs unit that it “didn’t happen.”  One of the reasons that errant police officer are allowed with impunity in the Elizabeth Police Department is the lack of a genuine internal affairs investigations that will honestly investigate citizens complaints.  Until this happens police officers like Conrad will continue to abuse the civil rights of citizens that they are sworn to protect.

Law Office of Vincent J. Sanzone, Jr.

CriminalDefenseNJ.com

Elizabeth, N.J.

(908) 354-7006

Dated: November 22, 2011

Criminal and Civil Rights Attorney in New Jersey

The Center for Constitutional Rights A Front for the Abortion Industry.

The latest ridiculous claim by The Center for Constitutional Rights (“CCR”) located in New York City, is their claim that the Roman Catholic Church has engaged in crimes against humanity. 

Recently the CCR filed a formal complaint to initiate an investigation with the International Criminal Court (“ICC”).  The ICC is located at The Hague in the Netherlands, and was formed to enforce the Rome Treaty (“Treaty”).  A copy of the full version of the Treaty can be found at:    http://www.icc-cpi.int/NR/rdonlyres/ADD16852-AEE9-4757-ABE7-9CDC7CF02886/283503/RomeStatutEng1.pdf

With all due respect to some of the legitimate and worth while cases that the CCR has pursued in the past, this complaint against the Church is a baseless false attack on the Catholic Church at the behest of their friends and financial supports of the abortion industry and assorted other anti-Catholic groups.

The suit has no basis whatsoever in fact or law but was filed for media hype, with the goal of fanning hysteria and to continue to find, or manufacture, any news, even news dating back 50 years or more, claiming that the Catholic Church has been involved in a great conspiracy to molest children.

The claim in essence by the CCR is that the Holy Father Pope Benedict and other members of the clergy have engaged in a conspiracy and cover-up of priests who may have committed crimes while still members of the clergy.

The ICC was established on July 17, 1998 to investigate war crimes committed by individuals.  The ICC was established under the terms of the “Rome Treaty”.  For many reasons not part of this discussion the Treaty was never ratified by a number of countries.  It is worth noting that both the United States and the Vatican are not signatories of the Treaty.  However, it is suspected that one of the reasons that the Vatican and the United States never ratify the treaty was the argument that becoming part of this treaty would give the ICC jurisdiction against a country by a run-away court pursing false claims.

This is one of the reasons why the Vatican made the prudential judgment not to become a signatory because it would subject it to having to defend such a frivolous charge as evidence by the recent charge by the CCR.

In that regards the ICC, under Article 5 of the Act sets forth four types of crimes which it has jurisdiction: (1) The crime of genocide; (2) Crimes against humanity; (3) War Crimes; and, (4) The crime of aggression.

Under Article 7 of the Act “crimes against humanity” means any of the following acts committed as a part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, which are (a) murder, (b) extermination, (c) enslavement, (d) deportation or forcible transfer of population, (e) imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules or international law, (f) torture, (g) rape or any type of sexual violence of comparable gravity, (h) prosecution against any identifiable group because of race, national ethnic, cultural, religious or gender, (i) enforced disappearance of persons, (j) crimes of apartheid, and (k) other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering or serious injury or body or to mental or physical health.

A review of the criteria for the ICC’s jurisdiction clearly shows that the ICC has no jurisdiction to investigate the CCR’s claim.

Today the only organized entity that unceasingly defends the natural law and the rights of all peoples regardless of their economic status, religion, ethnicity, legal status, and race is the Catholic Church.

The CCR loses all credibility when they make such foolish claims against the only institution in the post-modern area that continually defends the unborn, children and depressed peoples of the world regardless of their nationally, gender or religion.

With such a foolish filing it is obvious that the CCR is a front and mouth piece for the abortion industry such as the likes of Planned Parenthood and other abortion advocates which financially support CCR.  The death service providers understand all to well that a false attack on the Church will distract people from the Church’s mission of peace and the protection of the unborn.  A truth (that life begins at conception) that the abortion industry and CCR has a vested interest in hiding.

Competent histories of all the religions of the world for over two thousands years have extolled the virtues of the Catholic Church which humanized the West by insisting through its teachings the sacredness of all human life.  The Catholic Church was the institution that developed the concept of hospitals, universities and modern science.

Pursing such a blandly false case by the CCR against the Catholic Church hurts their credibility and distracts people of good will, intelligence and reason, from supporting such an organization.  If the CCR truly believes what they claim they believe they would defend the rights of all peoples and withdraw this false claim against the Catholic Church and apologies.

“If you want peace work for justice” Pope John Paul, I

Law Office of Vincent J. Sanzone, Jr.

Civil Rights and Criminal Defense Attorney

Elizabeth, New Jersey

CriminalDefenseNJ.com

Dated: October 25, 2011

Occupy Wall Street Movement and the Constitutional Right of Every American to Engage In Peaceful Protest, And the Need for the Police Not To Engage In Police Brutality.

The First Amendment to the Bill of Rights which is part of the United States Constitution makes it clear that neither the Federal, State or local government can pass no law or abridge in anyway whatsoever the people from engaging in the lawful exercise of the right to freedom of speech, freedom of the press, right to peaceably assemble or from petitioning the government to redress the peoples grievances against the government.

This grass roots movement which is growing day by day is a movement by a segment of the population that understands that the current two party system is going to maintain the status quo, and is not interested in redressing the many injustices present today in the United States.

It is true, and it is no longer a secret, that both the Democratic and Republican parties have only one goal, at the expense of all others, that is doing everything possible to perpetuate their grab for power.  As soon as they achieve their grab for power they reward their close cadre of loyalist, and party friends.  In their quest for power demagoguery and rhetoric has no limits.

    

Politicians are brought and sold by the highest bidders like cheap pawns at an auction.  They have neither the ethics nor fortitude to do the right thing, because doing so would immediately kick them out of their exclusive club.

People are tried of multinational corporate creed and executives and the people whom control these corporations whom are obscenely rewarded for their creed.  Multinational corporations have no loyalty to the people of the United States, and this has been proven time and time again, by their willingness to close factories in the United States and ship them anywhere in search of the cheapest labor cost and tax avoidance.  They hoard billions of dollars in overseas profits overseas, and dare not send the money back to the United States for fear of paying their fair share of taxes.  Thus, the money sits or is invested overseas, thus creating more and more jobs for people overseas.

The working middle class are people who are drowning in housing debt, tuition debt, and medical debt.  The banks have robbed the people in this country with impunity and have been rewarded by government handouts, and higher bonuses and salaries for their executives.  No bank official has been prosecuted for their reckless use of derivative swaps, which carried our nation to the cusp of another great depression.

Recent college and high school graduates cannot obtain a decent job.  And blue collar workers in the millions are left without jobs and no prospect of every finding another job paying a livable wage.

In reference to the Occupy Wall Street protesters, I hope that the police monitoring these peaceful protest do not engage in police misconduct in the form of police brutality, or by tricking protesters in marching into areas which they are prohibited and then arresting them. This type of unlawful behavior by the police has already occurred in New York City last week when many hundred of protesters were told to walk into a particular area and then arrested without notice for being in a prohibited area.  In New York City all of the protesters, except a very small minority, have been peaceful and have exercised their constitutional rights with exemplary behavior.

If the police use unlawful police techniques this will not only anger the protesters, but the general public who by in large support these protests.  The mayors and police commissioners of the respective cities should not tolerate any police brutality.

"If you want peace work for justice." Pope John Paul I

Law Office of Vincent J. Sanzone, Jr.

CriminalDefenseNJ.com

Elizabeth, N.J.

Telephone: (908) 354-7006 

Dated: October 14, 2011

Occupy Wall Street, Freedom to Protest in NYC, NJ Civil Rights Attorney, Criminal lawyers NJ, NJ criminal and civil rights attorneys, Union County Criminal Law Defense.

The Execution of Troy Davis: The Criminal Justice System That Refuses to Admit It Might Have Made A Mistake.

Jurors are not Gods, they are human, and sometimes more times they we want to admit they convict the innocent.  This is especially true when law enforcement engages in police misconduct, coercion, and presenting false or misleading evidence to the jury.

More than 75% of the death row inmates exonerated by DNA evidence were convicted solely on faulty and unreliable eyewitness identification.

In the Troy Davis trial there was no DNA evidence against him, no reliable and conclusive forensic or ballistic testimony.  There was no murder weapon found.  Over the years seven of the nine witnesses whom testified against him at trial said that they had been coerced and pressured to identify Mr. Davis as the shooter.  Remarkable another witness came forward and stated through a sworn statement that another person actually admitted committing the crime.  There was overwhelming evidence that Troy Davis was innocent of the crime.

All of this reasonable doubt as to the guilt of Mr. Davis was insufficient to save his life.  Courts turned their back to him with legal minutia.  The Governor of Georgia and President of the United States turned their back on him.  And most damaging was the political hacks of the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles.

New Jersey was the first State in the United States to abolish the death penalty, and as attorney in this great State I am proud that New Jersey leads the United States in its progressive policies in protecting the rights of the criminally accused.   

The voice of the Catholic Church and other prominent anti-death penalty and death penalty individuals and organizations to stop the execution all fell on deaf ears.

I am convinced that because of Troy Davis’ execution it will bring an end to this disgrace and plight to this country’s morality, and because of his unjust execution the death penalty will be abolished forever through the United States.  Yes, Troy Davis has accomplished more in death than in life.  This case is not over.

Law Office of Vincent J. Sanzone, Jr.  
CriminalDefenseNJ.com

Elizabeth, New Jersey
Telephone: (908) 354-7006

Office Located at:  
277 North Broad Street
P.O. Box 261
Elizabeth, N.J. 07207
YourCivilRights@gmail.com

New Jersey Criminal Defense Attorney who has been practicing criminal law for 21 years.  Admitted State and Federal Court in New Jersey.  Admitted to the federal appeals courts for the Third and Fourth Circuit.  Also admitted pro hac vice for the federal Southern District of New York and Northern District of Ohio.

How to Win Your Criminal Case: The Use of A Forensic Meteorologist.

A forensic meteorologist does not predict future weather patterns but rather testifies as to what was the weather like yesterday, or two years ago, on a certain date, in a certain town or city.

The use of such an expert might be of extreme importance to discredit witnesses version of the lighting conditions, temperature, rain or snow fall, or wind speed, or other weather factors which might play a pivotal role in the guilt or innocence’s of a defendant.

Stephen Wistar (State College P.A.) a senior forensic meteorologist as well as other forensic meteorologist with AccuWeather have testified throughout the country in both civil and criminal cases as to weather conditions at a certain time and place in the past.

Law Office of Vincent J. Sanzone, Jr.

CriminalDefenseNJ.com

Dated: August 24, 2011

Elizabeth, Union County, New Jersey Criminal Defense Attorney

The Strauss-Kahn False Accusations of Rape Ends With the Manhattan District Attorney Doing The Right Thing and Dismissing All Charges.

To often in the criminal justice system the local county prosecutors in New Jersey fail to do the right thing by not dismissing cases which have little or no merit.  Unfortunately to often in New Jersey when a police officer swears out a criminal complaint against someone the factual basis of the complaint is never fully investigated by the county prosecutor’s office to determine whether the complaint has any merit. 

It has been my experience that to often instead of dismissing the case outright as did the Manhattan District Attorney did in the Strauss-Kahn case, the assistant prosecutor handling the case will attempt to extract from the defendant some sort of plea.  Typically they will threaten the defendant with further prosecution unless the defendant applies for Pretrial Intervention (PTI), or accept a plea to a disorderly person’s offense or municipal ordinance.  The purpose of PTI is not to extort a plea against a defendant who is innocent, but rather to give a guilty defendant, a second chance with a diversionary program. 

In the Strauss-Kahn case the alleged victim, Nafissatou Diallo, in one of her meetings with the district attorney recounted a brutal rape which she endured in Guinea. Diallo recounted the event with great emotion and conviction. However, after being convinced by her attorney to come clean she admitted that the rape in Guinea was a complete fabrication and a total lie.  In the eyes of the prosecution team that was enough to dismiss the case because how could they ask a jury to believe someone whom they themselves could not.   The key is that the district attorney in New York could not believe her story beyond a reasonable doubt, so therefore, ethically, they could not ask a jury to what they could not.

Recently in Union County instead of dismissing completely a sexual contact charge against my client, the prosecutor last offer was for the client to plea to a non-criminal municipal ordinance charge.  Of course faced with further criminal prosecution my client like 99% of all defendants accepted the non-criminal ordinance plea.  In that case the prosecutor after learning that the alleged victim’s story was not credible should have simply dismissed the charges completely.  If a prosecutor cannot believe an alleged victims story beyond a reasonable doubt, they cannot ethically ask a jury to do what they cannot do.

Again I applaud the District Attorney in Manhattan for doing the right thing in the Strauss-Kahn case and see no reason why that same policy should not be followed in New Jersey.  After all the job the prosecutor is not force everyone to plea to something, but to do the right thing and to insure that justice is done no matter what the result is.

Law Office of Vincent J. Sanzone, Jr.

CriminalDefenseNJ.com

Dated: August 24, 2011

Elizabeth, New Jersey Criminal Defense Attorney