Ken Vercammen, family & dog wish you Happy Holidays & Merry Christmas.
New Rule: Mandatory Electronic Filing in Criminal Matters - eCourts Criminal.
No Automatic Rejection for PTI. State v Rizzitello.
Expert should not be permitted to testify on ultimate issue. State v. Simms.
1. Ken Vercammen, family & dog wish you Happy Holidays & Merry Christmas.
In the true spirit of the Holiday and Christmas season, may we all be thankful and share in the hope for peace on earth and goodwill toward all.
One of the pleasures of this holiday season is to thank many people for their friendship, goodwill and the pleasant association I have enjoyed with the hundreds of friends and professional people I have dealt with over the past several years. We sincerely appreciate our relationships and are thankful for the confidence many people have shown in us. I again want to take the time to extend to these friends our sincere gratitude because it is friends and new clients that make our business grow. Client recommendation is a very important source of new clients to us.
2. New Rule: Mandatory Electronic Filing in Criminal Matters - eCourts Criminal.
NOTICE TO THE BAR from the Supreme Court
This notice is to inform the bar that the Court has determined that electronic filing in Criminal matters using eCourts Criminal will be mandatory effective December 15, 2016, with certain limited exceptions. Attached is the Court's December 5, 2016 order to that effect.
As set forth in the Court's order, as of December 15, 2016, all attorneys and law firms seeking to file documents in criminal matters must do so electronically through eCourts, except in the following limited instances: (1) cases not tracked in PROMIS/Gavel, e.g., expungements, gun permit filings, municipal appeals; (2) filings that are not part of the court's official case file, e.g., prosecutor discovery pursuant to Rule 3:13-3(b)(1); (3) filings where a fee is specifically required, e.g., municipal appeals, expungements; and (4) Megan's Law filings.
Other than in those specified limited instances, any document for filing not submitted through eCourts Criminal will be returned to the filing attorney marked as "received but not filed," with notice that it must be filed electronically within ten days of being returned in order to preserve the original received date as the filed date.
Questions regarding this notice and the Supreme Court's order may be directed to Superior Court Clerk Michelle M. Smith by email at [email protected] or by telephone at 609-421-6100.
Dated: December 5, 2016
Glenn A. Grant, J.A.D., Acting Administrative Director of the Courts
SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY
Pursuant to N.J. Const. Art. VI., sec. 2 par. 3, it is ORDERED that the Rules Governing the Courts of the State of New Jersey are supplemented and relaxed so as to require that effective December 15, 2016, all documents filed by attorneys in New Jersey criminal matters must be submitted electronically through eCourts Criminal, with certain limited exceptions as set forth in this order.
The four limited exceptions to the requirement to file all documents in Criminal matters electronically are as follows: (1) cases not tracked in PROMIS/Gavel, e.g., expungements, gun permit filings, municipal appeals; (2) filings that are not part of the court's official case file, e.g., prosecutor discovery pursuant to Rule 3:13-3(b)(1); (3) filings where a fee is specifically required, e.g., municipal appeals, expungements; and (4) Megan's Law filings.
It is FURTHER ORDERED that effective December 15, 2016 and until further order, the provisions of Court Rule 1:5-6 ("Filing") are supplemented and relaxed so as to permit the Superior Court clerk to return pleadings received other than electronically through eCourts to the filing party as "received but not filed" where those documents are required to be electronically filed. Those returned documents must thereafter be electronically filed within 10 days of being returned in order to preserve the original received date as the filed date.
Dated: December 5, 2016
For the Court
3. No Automatic Rejection for PTI. State v Rizzitello.
Defendant was indicted on a single count of fourth-degree operating a motor vehicle during the period of license suspension for a second or subsequent conviction for driving while intoxicated, in violation of N.J.S.A. 2C:40-26(b). The State appeals from the order of the trial court which admitted defendant into PTI over the prosecutor's veto. The court reversed. The prosecutor's decision to reject defendant's application for admission into PTI did not constitute "a patent and gross abuse of discretion" as defined by the Supreme Court in State v. Roseman, 221 N.J. 611, 625 (2015).
The court rejects the prosecutor's characterization of the fourth degree offense under N.J.S.A. 2C:40-26(b) as falling within the crimes that by their very nature carry a presumption against admission into PTI. A-0536-15T2
4. Expert should not be permitted to testify on ultimate issue. State v. Simms.
Expert testimony that "embraces an ultimate issue to be decided by the trier of fact," N.J.R.E. 704, is not admissible unless the subject matter is beyond the ken of the average juror. State v. Nesbitt, 185 N.J. 504, 515-16, 519 (2006). Expert testimony is not necessary to tell the jury the "obvious" or to resolve issues that the jury can figure out on its own. In addition, a prosecutor may not "summarize straightforward but disputed evidence in the form of a hypothetical and then elicit an expert opinion about what happened." State v. Sowell, 213 N.J. 89, 102 (2013).
The erroneously assumed fact in the hypothetical question-that the object in defendant's hand was a bundle of heroin packets-unfairly buttressed the State's case. It was for the jury to decide the identity of the object based on an examination of the totality of the evidence. The ultimate-issue testimony on conspiracy, moreover, impermissibly intruded into the jury's singular role as trier of fact.
5. Next Events
January 7, 2017
Secret Mystery Winter Trail Run 2.5 Mile & 5 Mile Group Run 10:17am
New Start Location: Secret Mystery wooded area
ONLY $20.00 via:
2017 update Wills and Estate Planning- Free Seminar
Wednesday January 11, 2017
12:15-1:00 PM and again 5:15pm-6pm
Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen,
2053 Woodbridge Ave, Edison, NJ 08817
COST: Free if you pre-register by email. Complimentary materials provided at 12:00 sharp. We previously held this seminar for the Metuchen and Edison Adult schools. This program is limited to 15 people. Please bring a canned food donation, which will be given to a community food bank. Please email us if you plan on attending or if you would like us to email the materials.
SPEAKER: Kenneth Vercammen, Esq.
(Author- Answers to Questions About Probate)
The new NJ Probate Law made a number of substantial changes in Probate and the Administration of Estates and Trusts in New Jersey.
1. The New Probate Law and preparation of Wills
2. Increase in Federal Estate and Gift Tax exemption
3. Major changes to NJ Estate Tax & changes to taxes on pensions effective Jan 1
4. Power of Attorney
5. Living Will
6. Administering the Estate & Probate
COMPLIMENTARY MATERIAL: Brochures on Wills, "Answers to Questions about Probate" and Administration of an Estate, Power of Attorney, Living Wills, Real Estate Sales for Seniors, and Trusts.
Co-Sponsor: Middlesex County Estate Planning Council
Our Rating is calculated using information the lawyer has included on their profile in addition to the information we collect from state bar associations and other organizations that license legal professionals. Attorneys who claim their profiles and provide Avvo with more information tend to have a higher rating than those who do not.
What determines Avvo Rating?
Experience & background
Years licensed, work experience, education
Legal community recognition
Peer endorsements, associations, awards
Legal thought leadership
Publications, speaking engagements
This lawyer was disciplined by a state licensing authority in .
Disciplinary information may not be comprehensive, or updated. We recommend that you always check a lawyer's disciplinary status with their respective state bar association before hiring them.