New Jersey Section 2C:43-21 – Index and Reports

New Jersey Section 2C:43-21 is part of the state’s criminal code that requires the Administrative Director of the Courts to establish and maintain an index of cases involving applications for pretrial intervention or “supervisory treatment.” This index allows the courts to track the use of pretrial intervention across the state. Here is an overview of this law and its implications:

What is Pretrial Intervention?

Pretrial intervention (PTI) programs allow defendants to avoid formal prosecution and potential conviction by completing a period of supervision, treatment, or other conditions[1][2]. New Jersey’s pretrial intervention program was established in 1970 as an alternative to traditional criminal prosecution[3]. It aims to provide early rehabilitative services and avoid the stigma of a criminal trial and conviction.

Eligible defendants are diverted into PTI before trial. The defendant must admit guilt, but there is no formal conviction if PTI is completed successfully. Charges are dismissed upon completion. PTI typically involves 12-36 months of supervision, fines, restitution, counseling, treatment, community service, or other conditions tailored to the defendant and offense[1].

Overview of Section 2C:43-21

Section 2C:43-21 is part of the New Jersey Code of Criminal Justice. It states[4]:

“The Administrative Director of the Courts shall establish and maintain an index of cases in which applications for supervisory treatment have been made and such other indices as the Supreme Court shall require by rule.”

This requires the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) to create and maintain a statewide index of all cases involving PTI applications.

The purpose is to allow analysis of how PTI is utilized across the state. The index provides aggregate data that can reveal trends, inconsistencies, and other insights into the use of PTI.

Constitutional and Practical Considerations

Critics have raised some concerns regarding the PTI index:

• Right to Privacy: There are questions about tracking individuals through PTI without consent, even if data is aggregated. However, names/identifiers are not included in the index.
• Disparate Impact: Critics argue the index could be used to limit PTI for minorities if disparities are found. But its purpose is to detect and reduce unequal treatment.
• Burdensome: Compiling and maintaining the index does create an administrative burden for the courts. But most data is already collected during the PTI process.
• Benefits Outweigh: Overall, most experts find the benefits of better understanding PTI trends outweigh the small privacy and administrative concerns.

Many states have similar PTI tracking provisions with no major constitutional or logistical issues reported. As long as personal information remains protected, Section 2C:43-21 provides a valuable source of statewide data to improve the fair and consistent administration of pretrial intervention.