Princeton Office
Saturday, May 19, 12:33 pm
Shoplifting in New Jersey – No longer a minor offense
In New Jersey, what acts are counted as shoplifting?
Taking away merchandise with the intention of paying less than the full price to the merchant Hiding merchandise on your body or something you’re carrying with the intention of not paying for it. Removing, altering, or transferring a price tag with the intention of paying less than the full price to the merchant. Transferring merchandise from the container in which it’s displayed to another container with the intention of paying less than the full price to the merchant (for example, putting a small item inside a large item and only paying for the larger item)
Under-ringing with the intention of paying less than the full price to the merchant
Removing a shopping cart with the intention of not returning it
Intention? How do I prove someone “intended” not to pay me?
There is a presumption in the law that if you find unpurchased merchandise hidden on someone or in their belongings, that he or she hid it deliberately and intends not to pay for it.
What are the penalties for shoplifting?
It depends on the “full retail value” of the merchandise that was stolen.
- 2nd Degree, if the full retail value of property is $75,000 or more; penalties are imprisonment of 5-10 years and fine up to $150,000
- 3rd Degree; if the full retail value is over $500 but less than $75,000; penalties are imprisonment of 3-5 years and a fine up to $15,000
- 4th Degree; if the full retail value of of the property is between $200 and $500; penalties are imprisonment up to 18 mos. and a fine up to $10,000
- Disorderly Persons Offense; if the full retail value of of the property is under $200; penalties include imprisonment up to 6 mos. and a fine up to $1,000
Additional mandatory penalties include:
for a first offense, at least 10 days of community service
for a second offense, at least 15 days of community service
for a third or subsequent offense, up to 25 days of community service AND imprisonment for no less than 90 days
Top 10 States for Speeding Tickets
Call for a free consultation! (609) 259-7600
37 Robbinsville-Allentown Rd Robbinsville, NJ 08691 Tel. (609) 259-7600 Fax (609) 259-7303heyburn@heyburnlaw.com
Domestic Violence and Seizure of “Weapons”
If you are charged with an act of domestic violence, any weapons you have will probably be seized. What you will be surprised to find out is what the Prosecutor’s Office considers a weapon. It may be your car, a laptop, cell phone or your favorite Ipod. You may also be surprised to find out that you may never get these items back even if you are exonherated of the charges.
In essence, there are three ways in which weapons can be returned. First, if the domestic violence complaint is dismissed and no probable cause exists to indict the aggressor. Second, the person who subjects the victim to domestic violence had any charges pending against him/her dismissed. The last remaining option is whether, even if the charges against the defendant were dismissed, and the domestic violence complaint was dismissed and no probable cause existed to indict the defendant, the court, after holding a hearing, determines there still existed some underlying reason to seize the weapons to protect the victim of the domestic violence, i.e. a violent situation no longer existed. If you are found not guilty or the charges are dismissed than the Prosecutor can ask for a hearing and argue that you are unfit to get your property/weapon back.
Call for a free consultation! (609) 259-7600
37 Robbinsville-Allentown Road, Robbinsville, NJ 08691
Tel. (609) 259-7600 Fax (609) 259-7303
heyburn@heyburnlaw.com
An Innocent Man Freed Today
.jpg)
Edward Harrington Heyburn successfully convinced the Mercer County Prosecutor’s Office to dismiss 2nd Degree Armed Robbery charges against a Pennsylvania man on March 16, 2010. The client has been incarcerated in the Mercer County Correctional Center since the Fall of 2009. In the underlying case, the State alleged that the Pennsylvania man used a gun to rob approximately $200 from a Trenton resident on his way to the train station. During the course of Mr. Heyburn’s investigation, it was discovered that the alleged victim had a cell phone and did not call police immediately after the incident. It also appeared that the alleged victim walked past NJ Transit Police at the train station, never telling them he was robbed. The alleged victim did not call the police until after he boarded the train and called his mother to tell her what happened.
Earlier this year Ed Heyburn demanded trial and advised the Court that his client had three (3) alibi witnesses that placed him in Pennsylvania when the incident was alleged to have occurred. After Judge Osterer called the matter in for trial, the State dismissed the charge.
This case is proof that justice can only be obtained when you hire a trial attorney who is ready, willing and able to defend you before a jury of your peers.
Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/NJInjuryLawyer
- Personal Injury
- Workers Compensation
- Criminal Matters
- Traffic Matters
- DWI/DUI
- Municipal Court
- Family Law, Divorce, Custody and DYFS Cases.
Call for a free consultation! (609) 259-7600
37 Robbinsville-Allentown Road, Robbinsville, NJ 08691
Tel. (609) 259-7600 Fax (609) 259-7303
heyburn@heyburnlaw.com
Robbinsville Township and 4 other area schools leave their children behind…
On January 21, 2010, the Messenger-Press reported that Robbinsville and four other schools have failed to meet the annual mark for the “No Child Left Behind Program.” Students failed to achieve the minimum scores on the annual standardized test. The others schools are also the Upper Freehold Regional School District and Plumstead School district.
The Law Offices of Edward Harrington Heyburn, PC is cuurently challanging the adequacy of the Robbinsville Special Education Program which warehosed students with special needs. Our offices is request that the school district pay for private special education in light of their inability to provide Free Appropriate Public education. If you have any questions concerning a challange to a school board’s decision, please call Edward Harrington Heyburn at (609) 259-7600.
New Jersey Poised to Strengthen Seat Belt Laws
Governor Coresine is set to sign a new seat belt law that will permit police officers to pull drivers over for failure to wear a seatbelt. Although failure to wear a seatbelt is currenly illegal, the new law will allow police officer to stop motorist for failing to wear a seatbelt even if they have not committed any other violations. Ironically, it was Governor Coresine that was injured when in an accident because he failed to wear a sealt belt. Buckle up now or Buck up later.
5 Year International Custody Battle Ends
David Goldman won an international custody battle that began 5 years ago when his wife took their son to Brazil. Mrs. Goldman established residency and divorced David Goldman and then remarried in Brazil. The controversy peaked when the former Mrs. Golman died during child birth. Her new husband, Silva continued the custody battle for Sean Goldman and thwarted the fathers efforts to bring his son back to the United States. Finally, on December 23, 2009 a judge from Brazil’s highest court ruled in Mr. Goldman’s favor and permitted him to take Sean back to the United States.
While the facts of the Goldman’s case are unusual, they highlight the fears of separated parents involved in custody battles. If you are involved in a custody battle and fear that your spouse may flee the jurisdiction, you should demand that they surrender their passport to the court.
NJ Supreme Court says Drivers can use Unsafe Statute 3rd time
In State v. Hina K. Patel, the NJ Supreme Court held under N.J.S.A. 39:4-97.2(e), the exemption provision for assessing motor vehicle penalty points for an unsafe driving offense that occurs more than five years after “the prior offense,” “the prior offense” refers only to the most recent preceding offense based on both a plain reading of the statute and a review of the legislative history. Thus, the MVC correctly imposed motor vehicle points on Patel for having a fourth unsafe driving conviction in 2007, only one year after the date of her prior, third, unsafe driving offense. This means that drivers that do not use their 3rd Unsafe Operation for 5 years after their 2nd offense are elligible to a No Point downgrade.
