Tuesday, February 21, 2017

Tweet By Defendant Can Be Admissible in a Criminal Case




The Defendant charged with assault tweeted, “shoe to ya face” to the victim.

The State in the prosecution of the defendant proffered a tweet by the defendant which was admitted by the trial court.  The defendant objected on appeal and argued that the tweet was not properly authenticated, and could have been easily forged.  The defendant was convicted and appealed.

The appellate division in State v. Hannah (December 20, 2016), held that the tweet was admissible and that in this case there was sufficient circumstantial evidence that the tweet in fact had come from the defendant.  In all such cases the court held that the traditional rules set forth in N.J.R.E. 901, and that each case in which this type of evidence is being moved into evidence court must examine the rule, and admit such evidence if admitting such evidence would not be an abuse of discretion.

Law Office of Vincent J. Sanzone, Jr., Esq.
30-years of experience as criminal lawyer in Elizabeth, Newark, Jersey City, New Brunswick, Union, Hudson, Middlesex and Essex County
(908) 354-7006
CriminalDefenseNJ.com

Monday, February 20, 2017

Expungement of CDS Conspiracy Charge in New Jersey





Provided as a public service by Attorney Vincent J. Sanzone, Jr.

Expungement of criminal records under New Jersey law is not as easy and simple as one might expect.  New Jersey Expungement Law is complex and the interpretation of the law is often difficult to understand.  A recent appellate division case addressed the issue of whether a conspiracy to commit a drug offense should be treated differently than the substantive crime for expungement purposes.
In June of 2016, the New Jersey Appellate Division ruled In the Matter of the Expungement Petition of D.P., that a conviction for Conspiracy to Distribute CDS is not similar to the substantive crime of Intent to Distribute or accomplice liability of Intent to Distribute.  The Court held that the conspiracy offense unlike the substantive crime (or accomplice liability) is expungable.


Before you retain and attorney to expunge your criminal records you should seek an attorney with extensive experience in New Jersey Expungement Law.  Law Office of Vincent J. Sanzone, Jr., has been helping people expunge their criminal records for 30-years, allowing them to get a fresh start in life and move forward with productive lives.  In today’s economy it is almost impossible to obtain employment with a criminal conviction.

Law Office of Vincent J. Sanzone, Jr., Esq.
Elizabeth, N.J.
(908) 354-7006





Wednesday, November 30, 2016

New Jersey Appellate Division Ruled Aggregation of Two Types of CDS Not Permitted



The Appellate Division on November 14, 2016 held that Judge Marilyn C. Clark, J.S.C. was correct in ruling that N.J.S.A. 2C:35-5(c) does not permit the aggregation of two different types of drugs, which in this case was Heroin and Cocaine for the purposes of charging the defendant with a first degree crime.

Judge Clarke held at the trial level, which the Appellate Division affirmed that under the plain language of the statute and under the doctrine of lenity, the language of N.J.S.A. 2C:35-5(a)(1) states that it is illegal to “manufacture, distribute or dispense, a controlled dangerous substance.”  The key word being substance, not the plural, substances, as the prosecutor argued to the court.  Judge Clark did however ruled that aggregation is permitted with the same substance, sold on different dates to reach the first degree level.  Further, because possession with intent to distribute different substances do not merge is further support that Title 35 controlled dangerous substance crimes, are crimes that must be dealt with separately.  State v. Jordan, 235 N.J. Super. 517, 520 (App. Div. 1989).

In joint prosecution for co-defendants, the jury must also decide under N.J.S.A. 2C:35-5(c), the court noted: “Where the degree of the offense for violation of this Section depends on the quantity of the substance, the Quantity involved shall be determined by the trier of fact... in determining the grade of the offense, whether distribution or dispensing is to the same person or several persons.”

This is a good decision for the defense bar because it interprets an area of the New Jersey Drug Law which is often misinterpreted.

Quote of the Day: “God offers to every mind its choice between truth and repose.  Those who choose repose receive release from the mandates of truth; but it is only temporary. No man or woman can reject truth forever.  Those who choose truth, on the other hand, have no rest—and so they continue to fight for justice.”  Ralph Waldo Emerson. 



Law Office of Vincent J. Sanzone, Jr., Esq.

Elizabeth, N.J. Union County, Essex, County, Ocean, Monmouth, Hudson County, Bergen County, Passaic County


Telephone: (908) 354-7706

YourCivilRights@gmail.com




Friday, November 4, 2016

The Evil of Moral Relativeness


In 1992, Justice Anthony Kennedy, wrote in Planned Parenthood vs. Caseythat “at the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”
That is the type of disordered thinking that can lead to the absurd judicial decision, to wit, the killing of the unborn child for any reason based on the subjective belief of the mother that the physical or mental wellbeing of the mother could be adversely affected.   Yes, even under the absurd pretext that it would cramp the mother’s life style.  Justice Kennedy should be reminded that our founding Fathers actually believed that the right to life is given to us in the Bill of Rights by our Creator, and not by the Supreme Court.

No Justice Kennedy, this type of thinking leads to moral relativeness, which means that there is no objective truth, that anyone can decide what is true, and it is for the individual to decide what is truth, no matter how absurd and evil that might be.  If everything is true, as Justice Kennedy says, there is no absolute truth.  No Justice Kennedy there is objective moral truth, and to turn ones back on objective moral truth will lead to the absolute destruction of a civilized society as we know it.

There is no question that this type of disordered thinking leads us down the road to moral destruction.  If we can kill the unborn baby because an individual decides that this is not a person and has (“defined one’s own concept of existence”), why not kill the infirmed, the mentally handicapped or the elderly.   For that matter anyone that does not follow one’s own concept of existence. 

A distorted view of the natural law as espoused by Justice Kennedy is simply a recital of the positive law concept espoused by dictators and tyrants, who have turned their backs on God and the natural law.  History has gave us a multitude of tyrants and evil dictators, especially in the 20th Century who decided who was a person, and who was worth of having the protection of the state.  Wasn’t it Adolph Hitler who decides that people of the Jewish faith were none person, worthy to be only to be murdered by the State. 
Where does such disordered thinking end.  If our judges of the highest court in the United States ascribe to such nonsense is anyone safe?  What has the sexual revolution brought us but the seeing of another, not being of beauty made in the likeness and imagine of God, but rather an object to be used and sometimes sadly even abused.

Equally troubling is the dictatorship of the followers of this post-pagan hearses.  These proponents of such disordered thinking will not hesitate to demonize anyone who will not follow and subscribe to this type of pagan and destructive thinking.  They falsely label themselves as progressives and people of acceptance and inclusion, but in reality they are the ones who in the end will force all of us to accept, or be eliminated, if their “concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life,” is not accepted. The dictatorship of moral relativism is already upon us and few of us even know what is happening.

In a true democracy it is not so much as what we can do, but what we ought to do.  When we fail to do what is “right and justice” there can be no real true freedom.

Law Office of Vincent J. Sanzone, Jr., Esq.
Elizabeth, (Union County, Essex County) New Jersey
(908) 354-7006
CriminalDefenseNJ.com


Monday, October 24, 2016

Winning Strategies for a Successful NJ Criminal Trial Lawyer


This blog is being prepared as a public service by the Attorney Vincent J. Sanzone,Jr., and is not meant for specific legal advice.  In the event that you are charged with a crime, disorderly persons offense or misdemeanor you are directed to seek the legal advice of an experienced and acknowledgeable New Jersey criminal defenseattorney.

Often it is asked what makes a good criminal defense trial lawyer, and what does it take to convince a judge or jury that your client is innocent, or that state or government has presented a case with reasonable doubt in which the law requires an acquittal, or a finding of not guilty.

The first thing that the attorney must be is real, when I say real, I mean that you must present yourself to a judge and jury in such a way, that judge or jury perceives the attorney as actually believing in his client’s innocence, or in the alternative that the reasonable doubt is in fact real and present and that it would be a miscarriage of justice to render a verdict of guilty on the facts presented by the prosecutor.

How can a judge or jury give the benefit of doubt, which is reasonable doubt to the defendant, if the attorney who knowns the defendant best, acts and speaks as if he could care less about the outcome, and is only going through the motions.  Yes emotions do count, and most people in fact live most of their life through emotional responses.  Few people look at things totally analytically and logically.  Yes jurors and judges are no different.  Passion and dedication do matter, and attorneys who fail to dig down deep to their core being will not be able to convince the jury of their client’s side of the story.  Yes every defendant needs their side of the story to be told, and it is only his or her attorney that can do that through opening statements, cross-examination, presenting of defense witnesses and summations.  Yes a true criminal defense attorney who wins cases will have three things at his disposable, mind, heart and soul. 

Quote of the Day

Philosophy and theology are blueprints for life which can tell us right from wrong.  Although most people wrongly think that science and history can do just that, to wit, give us a moral framework which it cannot.  A hammer (science) can help you to build a church (history), but the hammer can’t tell you want the church should look like or what message will be taught in the church. Only when we adhere to solid moral teaching can we be assured of not repeating history and making the same awful mistakes.



Law Office of Vincent J. Sanzone, Jr., Esq.

New Jersey Criminal Defense Attorney with 26-years of successful trial experience. Union, Hudson, Middlesex, Essex, Ocean, Monmouth Counties and others.

Elizabeth, N.J. www.criminaldefensenj.com

(908) 3540-7007



Friday, September 30, 2016

Supreme Court Kicks Out State's Drug Expert in Intent to Distribute Cases




State v. Cain, New Jersey Supreme Court (March, 2016)

New Jersey Supreme Court breaks new ground and essentially overrules State v. Odom, which was a virtual killer for criminal defendants going to trial for intent to distribute CDS case.

Under State v. Odom, prosecutor’s used so-called law enforcement experts to give opinions before the jury that the method of packaging, purity and quantity, among other things, of the CDS found, was consistent with possession with intent to distribute, and not for personal use.

Finally, our Supreme Court has ruled that such statements by prosecution witnesses encourages upon the ultimate issue of the guilt of the defendant, is highly prejudicial and no longer permissible.  New Jersey now follows similar rulings in Florida, Connecticut and New York.

The Cain case originated out of Bergen County, in which a Hackensack Police Detective testified as that the Marijuana recovered at the defendant’s residence was with the intent to distribute.

The Court also frowned on the prosecutor’s repeated reference to the fact that the CDS drugs were seized after a judicial search warrant on the defendant’s residence. Although the court did not issue its reversal of the defendant’s conviction on that basis because it reversed on the expert opinion.

If you are charged with a drug offense your choice of a criminal defense attorney is very important, and experience in handling these types of cases is very important. 

Before you hire a criminaldefense attorney you must investigate his or her experience in handling the complex drug case.  It could mean the difference of going to jail or your freedom.

AttorneyVincent J. Sanzone, Jr., Esq., has been practicing criminal law, and his a criminal trial attorney with 26-years of experience in trying criminal cases throughout New Jersey Superior Court and Federal District Court of New Jersey.

(908) 354-7006
Bergen County Criminal Defense Attorney







Tuesday, May 3, 2016

Choosing the Right Attorney to Handle Your Motor


Like anything else choosing the right attorney to handle your motor vehicle summons might make all the difference in the world.  Choosing an attorney with many years of experience might make the difference between a fantastic disposition of the motor vehicle charges as opposed to an adequate result.

Like all areas of the law the handling of motor vehicle summons in municipal court takes a level of experience and skill which is acquired over many years of practice. 
Attorney Sanzone has handled thousands of motor vehicle cases in his 26-years of practice and has achieved many very favorable dispositions.

Just last week for example Attorney Sanzone achieved the complete dismissal of a CDS in a motor vehicle charge and possession of CDS in municipal court, (Somerset County) after filing a motion to suppress evidence.  On the same day, in Hudson County, in other case municipal court achieved a complete dismissal of the charge of leaving the scene of the accident in which property damage was allegedly made.

In this time of attorney direct mailings it is important the client research carefully the attorney’s track record and years of experience before retaining an attorney to handle your motor vehicle case.  Like all decisions, choosing the attorney who has the lowest price might not be the smartest decision. 
Today, yes, even motor vehicle convictions can have adverse consequences on obtaining a good paying job, not to mention the collateral consequences of having a bad driving record. 

A criminal defense attorney in New Jersey who handles motor vehicle case in all cities and towns in New Jersey, including Bayonne, Jersey City, Kearny, and all other cities in Hudson County.

Elizabeth New Jersey Office, (908) 354-7006
Bayonne, New Jersey Office, (201) 240-5716