Atlantic City, New Jersey Criminal Law Blog

A recent amendment to New Jersey's expungment statute allows for an expungement petition to be filed five-year after sentencing. The expungement statute N.J.S.A. 2C:52-2(a) was amended effective March 13, 2012 to provide:

A petition may be filed and presented, and the court may grant an expungement pursuant to this section when:

(a) at least five years has expired from the date of his conviction, payment of fine, satisfactory completion of probation or parole or release from incarceration, whichever is later; and

(b) the person has not been convicted of a crime, disorderly persons offense, or petty disorderly persons offense since the time of the conviction and the court finds that expungement is in the public interest, giving due consideration to the nature of the offense and the applicant's character and conduct since conviction.

A recent Atlantic County case addressed the new expungement law where the prosecutor objected to an early expungement arguing that it was not in the public interest.

Unaware that it is illegal for anyone under the age of 21 to gamble in an Atlantic City casino or any private location around the state, many young people will travel to Atlantic City with their families and upon entering the casino for an evening of fun find themselves being charged with a criminal offense of underage gambling. Underage gambling is treated very seriously by law enforcement officials and prosecutors, and the penalties, even for first-time offenders, can be significant having serious and lasting consequences. Even an underage person who is on the casino floor can be charged with a crime that could end up as a permanent mark on a criminal record.

The Casino Control Act (N.J.S.A. 5:12-119) prohibits anyone under the age of 21 from gambling in an Atlantic City casino or any simulcast facility. If an individual is convicted of underage gambling the penalty is a disorderly persons offense which is a criminal charge that becomes part of your criminal record. A conviction for underage gambling will also result in a fine of between $500 and $1,000 and the individual's driver's license will be suspended for six months. If the individual is under 17 and has not yet obtained a driver's license, the issuance of that person's driver's license will be postponed for six months.

In fact, if a parent or a person who has custody or control of a person under the age of 21 allows an underage individual to gamble, that person can be charged with a disorderly persons offense. N.J.S.A. 5:12-119(c).

The real issue with these underage gambling charges is there are no plea bargains offered by the State. Thus, the State requires the defendant to either plead guilty to the charge or stand trial. You should contact an experienced criminal defense lawyer to represent you if you find yourself in this position. There is no reason to plead guilty to the offense. I can take the case to trial and make the State prove the charges against you beyond a reasonable doubt. Many times the State's witnesses fail to appear and the case can be dismissed against you. Regardless, it is imperative that you defend yourself at trial and attempt to avoid a permanent criminal charge on your record. This can have serious repercussions in terms of employment and educational opportunities.

I am John W. Tumelty, and I have practiced criminal defense in Atlantic City, Cape May County and across the state of New Jersey. For more 28 years, I have prosecuted and defended individuals on a wide range of criminal charges, including underage gambling and other juvenile crimes.

If you are being charged with underage gambling, or your child is facing such a serious charge, you need to speak with an experienced criminal defense lawyer.

If you or a loved one has been arrested for underage gambling in New Jersey, contact me today to discuss what I can do to defend you against the criminal charges. Schedule a free initial consultation by calling toll free at 866-677-2549.

The New Jersey Department of Corrections has long known that there was a problem with incarcerated gang members' ability to continue gang affiliations. The State of New Jersey's Commission of Investigation recently published a report showcasing the loopholes that these inmates exploit to continue illegal activity while in prison.

One way inmates maintain contact with fellow gang members is via cell phones. By maintaining contact, criminals are able to order hits, make financial transactions and continue running drug operations while incarcerated. Cell phones are typically smuggled in by visitors and corrupt guards. This activity makes it difficult for prison officials to maintain safe facilities and can increase violence when convicts are released back into the general public.

Published by the Law Office of John W. Tumelty

Attorney John W. Tumelty recently had Ocean City drug (marijuana) charges dismissed in Ocean City Municipal Court, Cape May County, New Jersey, resulting from an illegal car search. An Ocean City, NJ Police officer stopped his client's car for a motor vehicle violation. The officer pulled the car over and approached the client requesting his credentials. The officer observed a strong smell of marijuana coming from inside the car. He called for back-up officers for assistance. The officers ordered the client out of the car. The officers immediately began searching the car and seized a brown bag on the rear floor. They opened the bag and found clear plastic bags with marijuana.

Attorney Tumelty filed a motion to suppress the evidence challenging the officer's right to search the car. The police may not search a car without a warrant or exigent circumstances. The illegal search led to a dismissal of the marijuana charges. The client avoided a criminal record for marijuana possession and a loss of driver's license.

See our complete criminal defense website at www.johntumeltylaw.com

Despite widely-publicized outrage aimed at Wall Street, bankers and shifty corporate leaders of all stripes, the number of criminal cases targeting white collar offenses has actually been spiraling downward over the last decade.

Yet, businesspeople should not archive the number of that Atlantic City white collar crimes attorney just yet. The drop in prosecutions aside, law enforcement officials are still very watchful for certain types of corporate fraud, and some experts are predicting a "bubble" in white collar cases as long-term investigations begin to bear fruit.

The recent Penn State scandal involving Jerry Sandusky has raised some questions in towns like Cape May and around the country about when a person is legally, as well as morally, required to report a crime. We have already seen some situations which require reporting of certain acts to authorities, such as suspected terrorism in Britain or toxic waste dumping in areas of the United States. Many people feel reporting should also be required in cases of child molestation or other sexual abuse involving a child.

While the state of New Jersey already requires every person to report child abuse, not reporting it is currently only a misdemeanor. Charges are usually only filed if a person has failed to report serious abuse, works in a setting where they have supervisory authority over kids or works in a position that requires a special license, such as a doctor.

It's a fact of life that most teenagers, even responsible kids from good families, will make some bad decisions as they're growing up. Despite their parents' warnings to the contrary, many will use alcohol. In fact, a recent survey showed that over 27 percent of New Jersey youth between the ages of 12 and 20 admitted to drinking alcohol within the past month.

However, a teen whose alcohol use leads to a charge for New Jersey underage drinking or DWI faces serious, and possibly life-altering, penalties.

Today, the United States Supreme Court will listen to oral arguments in Perry v. New Hampshire. This criminal defense case asks a very important question about eyewitness identification: Must a court exclude eyewitness identification evidence in every situation where the identification was unreliable because it suggested that the defendant committed a crime, or only in unreliable police eyewitness identifications?

As the law stands, police-arranged eyewitness identifications can be challenged in court. If the court finds that the eyewitness identification was too suggestive, it can exclude the evidence. Identifications performed by civilians, on the other hand, are not excluded. Instead, the jury decides whether the evidence is reliable or unreliable. This is one way that innocent defendants are wrongfully convicted of Atlantic City sex crimes, drug crimes, even murder.