Civil Model Jury Charge 3.20 E. ARREST WITHOUT WARRANT IN NJ
Civil Model Jury Charge3.20E.ARREST WITHOUT WARRANT FOR DISORDERLY PERSONS OFFENSE OR BREACH OF PEACEFALSE IMPRISONMENT (FALSE ARREST)
1
It
is the law of this State that a person--whether a private citizen or a
police officer may arrest another person without a warrant if the
arrested person has[committed what is called a disorderly persons offense] [violated a municipal ordinance involving a breach of the peace]in
the arresting persons presence and if the arrested person is then taken
to a judge or court clerk located in the county where the arrest took
place without any unnecessary delay.
The offense for which it was alleged that the defendant arrested the plaintiff was[a disorderly persons offense] [a violation of a municipal ordinance involving a breach of peace].This is an offense for which an arrest may be made without a warrant.
So, in deciding whether plaintiff was falsely imprisoned, there are two decisions you have to make.
The
first is that plaintiff must prove, by the greater weight of the
evidence, that defendant intentionally detained or restrained plaintiff
in his/her personal liberty or freedom of movement by arresting him/her.
The
second, assuming you find that defendant did intentionally restrain
plaintiff by an arrest, involves defendants claim that he/she had a
right to make the arrest and that, after the arrest, plaintiff was taken
before a judge or court clerk to obtain a warrant without any
unnecessary delay.
[Here discuss facts of arrest and detention].
If
you find that there was an arrest, then defendant must prove to you by
the greater weight of the evidence that the offense, for which the
arrest is said to have been made, was committed in defendants presence.Even
if you find that the offense was committed in the defendants presence
and, because of that, he/she arrested the plaintiff, you still must
consider whether he/she restrained the plaintiff only for a reasonable
period of time until the defendant could bring him/her to a judge or
court clerk or whether he/she confined the plaintiff for a length of
time that was unnecessary under the circumstances.A
reasonable time for confinement under the circumstances is the time that
an ordinarily cautious person would take to bring the plaintiff before a
judge or court clerk in the situation that faced the defendant.The
reasonableness of this time would be affected by the availability of
the judge or court clerk, the location of the arrest, the time of day or
night, the problem of confining the plaintiff, available means for
reaching the judge or court clerk and any other factors that you might
think had bearing on the amount of time.If the defendant
imprisoned the plaintiff for an unreasonable time, then even though the
original arrest was proper, the unreasonable delay would be false
imprisonment.If the arrest was proper and the confinement
reasonable according to the rules I have explained, then you must find
for the defendant.But if you find that there was a
confinement, and you find that either there was no right to make the
arrest or that there was an unnecessary delay in bringing plaintiff
before a local judge or court clerk, then you must find for the
plaintiff.
[go on to Damages (False Imprisonment), Charge 3.14G]
NOTE TO JUDGE
The
right of law enforcement officers to arrest without a warrant exists
when a felony has been committed in his/her presence or when he/she has a
reasonable basis to believe that a felony is being or has been
committed, and when he/she has a reasonable basis to believe that the
person to be arrested is committing or has committed the felony.State v. Doyle, 40N.J. 320 (1963).See alsoState v. Crawley, 90N.J. 241 (1982).A felony corresponds to a crime for which a person may be incarcerated for more than one year in a State prison as indicatedsupra.
The
authority for a law enforcement officers warrantless arrest for
offenses of lesser gravity than a crime is the same as for the citizen
as prescribed by the statutes quoted above.An officer may make a warrantless arrest for a disorderly persons offensesupra.he/she
may also arrest a shoplifter or detain a person whom he/she reasonably
believes is willfully concealing unpurchased merchandise.N.J.S.A. 2C:20-11,supra.
A
law enforcement officer further has the right to make a warrantless
arrest when he/she observes a violation of the motor vehicle laws.N.J.S.A. 39:5-25. And he/she may make reasonable detention pursuant to his/her administration of these laws.SeeAtty. Gen. F.O. 314 (1958);Pine v. Olzewski,supra.
A
police officer may not only apprehend an individual for committing a
disorderly persons offense but may also apprehend that individual for
violating a municipal ordinance involving a breach of the peace offense.
An arrest without a warrant for a violation of a municipal ordinance
may be made where the offense is committed upon view of the officer and
the offender must be either a disorderly person or have committed a
breach of the peace.SeeState v. Hurtado, 219N.J.Super. 12 (App. Div. 1987),reversed o.b., 113N.J. 1 (1988).
Even
when an arrest is justified, these common law and statutory rights are
not licenses to exercise an unlimited detention. A law enforcement
officer may not detain a person for an unreasonable time, after arrest,
without taking him/her before the nearest magistrate.Cannon v. Krakowitch, 54N.J. Super.93 (App. Div. 1959).
A
private citizen has the same duty as a law enforcement officer to take
the arrested party before a magistrate within a reasonable time.SeeState v. Ferraro, 81N.J.Super. 214 (Cty. Ct. 1963);Nelson v. Eastern Airlines, Inc., 128N.J.L. 46 (E. & A. 1942);Jackson v. Miller, 84N.J.L. 189 (Sup. Ct. 1913);N.J.S.A. 2A:169-3.
If
the arrest by the law enforcement officer is made with a warrant based
on proper complaint being made and a hearing held before a magistrate,
then an action for false arrest cannot be maintained.Gierman v. Toman, 77N.J.Super. 18 (Law Div. 1962);Baldwin v. Pt. Pleasant Beach and Surf Club, 3N.J.Super. 284 (Law Div. 1949).
It
is interesting to note that even if the arrest should prove illegal, a
private citizen has no right to use force to resist arrest against one
he/she knew or had reason to know was an authorized police officer
engaged in the performance of his/her duties.State v. Koonce, 89N.J.Super. 169 (App. Div. 1965).See alsoState v. Lawrence, 142N.J.Super. 208 (App. Div. 1976).In such a situation, a defendant law officer may be able to avail himself/herself of a counterclaim for assault and battery.
No comments:
Post a Comment