State v. A.M., 252 N.J. 432 (2023)

Barry Evenchick argued before the New Jersey Supreme Court on behalf of amicus curiae ACDL-NJ that the language and history of the CRA should be interpreted to require release of defendants who met the Act's criteria. Although the Court found that trial courts have the discretion to grant or deny a motion for release under the CRA, it cabined that discretion narrowly, concluding that a person who qualifies for release under the CRA should be released unless one or more extraordinary aggravating factors exist. In reaching its conclusion, the Court focused heavily on the Legislature's intent as set forth in our brief. CJ Griffin authored the brief.

Our firm is proud of the results it has achieved for clients, some of which are noted here.  Of course, each legal matter is unique on many levels, and past successes are not a guarantee of results in any other pending or future matters.