State of New Jersey v. James Denman, 158 A.3d 38

James Denman, a Scotch Plains police officer and longtime volunteer treasurer of the Police Athletic League (PAL), withdrew $18,000 from PAL's bank account in December 2013 without board approval or a promissory note and repaid it with interest about four months later.
Denman wrote "loan at 5%" on the withdrawal check and "repay + interest" on the repayment check; repayment came from his pension.
An anonymous tip prompted a Union County investigation and charge for third-degree attempted misapplication of funds.
Denman applied for Pretrial Intervention (PTI); the prosecutor denied PTI under Guideline 3(i)(4) as a "breach of the public trust," emphasizing Denman’s status as a police officer and PAL’s community role.
The Law Division affirmed the prosecutor, finding fiduciary duty to PAL and concluding the conduct breached the public trust.
The Appellate Division reversed, holding Guideline 3(i)(4) was misapplied because PAL received no public funds and Denman’s police employment did not make the conduct a public-trust breach; remanded for fresh prosecutorial consideration of PTI.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Denman’s unauthorized borrowing from PAL constituted a "breach of the public trust" under PTI Guideline 3(i)(4)	Denman, as PAL treasurer and a police officer, misappropriated funds from a police-community nonprofit, breaching public trust and making him presumptively ineligible for PTI	The loan concerned a private nonprofit funded by parents, not public money; Denman’s police employment and volunteer status do not convert the act into a public-trust breach	Reversed: conviction charge not a public-trust breach under Guideline 3(i)(4); prosecutor misapplied guideline and must reconsider PTI application ab initio

State v. Maddocks, 80 N.J. 98 (1979) (appellate courts may review as questions of law prosecutor's consideration of PTI factors)
State v. K.S., 220 N.J. 190 (2015) (prosecutor has broad discretion in PTI decisions; reversal requires patent and gross abuse)
State v. Wallace, 146 N.J. 576 (1996) (standard for overturning prosecutorial veto)
State v. Negran, 178 N.J. 73 (2003) (enhanced deference to prosecutorial PTI decisions)
State v. Baynes, 148 N.J. 434 (1997) (prosecutorial discretion and scope of review discussion)
State v. Leonardis, 73 N.J. 360 (1977) (limited judicial review of prosecutorial decisions)
State v. Roseman, 221 N.J. 611 (2015) (PTI criteria and review standards; remand when prosecutor misapplies factors)
State v. Watkins, 193 N.J. 507 (2008) (PTI individualized assessment requirement)
State v. Brooks, 175 N.J. 215 (2002) (limits on prosecutor's discretion in PTI decisions)
State v. Bender, 80 N.J. 84 (1979) (definition and elements of "breach of the public trust" for PTI guidance)