STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. JAIME H. FERNANDEZ(14-04-0388, MORRIS COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
A-1485-15T2
| N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. | Jul 18, 2017Background
- Officers went to serve defendant with a temporary restraining order requiring turnover of his child; defendant became agitated after a call and returned to the parking lot yelling.
- Video and officer testimony showed defendant charged at Officer Hering, screamed threats ("you'll have to kill me"), clenched keys in his fist, and resisted when officers tried to subdue him.
- Officers used pepper spray and force; they did not announce an intention to arrest before physical contact; neither officer expressly told defendant he was under arrest.
- Defendant was charged with third-degree resisting arrest and third-degree aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer; the jury convicted him of resisting arrest and acquitted him of aggravated assault.
- Trial court denied defendant's acquittal motion; judge instructed jury on lawful vs. unlawful arrest and did not give a justification instruction (defense counsel had not requested one).
- Appellate division affirmed: held evidence sufficed to support a lawful arrest once defendant became threatening, jury instructions were proper, and no justification instruction was warranted or invited.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | Fernandez's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to convict of resisting arrest | Evidence (video, officer testimony) showed Fernandez knowingly resisted officers after becoming threatening; a reasonable jury could convict | Arrest was not announced and initially officers lacked intent to arrest, so resisting-arrest charge should fail | Affirmed: viewing evidence favorably to State, jury could find defendant knew arrest was occurring and resisted; his conduct rendered arrest lawful and announcement unnecessary |
| Effect of officers not announcing arrest | Announcement unnecessary when arrest is lawful; failure to announce is one factor for jury to consider | Failure to announce rendered any arrest unlawful and precluded conviction for resisting an unlawful arrest | Affirmed: once defendant's conduct made officers’ intervention necessary (threats, charging), arrest became lawful and no announcement was required |
| Jury instructions on lawful vs unlawful arrest | Court followed Model Charge and repeatedly explained distinction; left determination to jury | Charge was ambiguous and failed to clearly distinguish officer obligations and defendant's responses | Affirmed: instructions accurately stated law, were repeated during trial, and not shown to have confused jury; no plain error found |
| Justification defense instruction (self-defense/unlawful force) | No record evidence officers used unlawful force; defendant did not request the charge and defense counsel agreed it need not be given | Court should have instructed on justification because statutory defense allows force if actor reasonably believes it necessary to protect himself from unlawful force | Affirmed: defendant (through counsel) declined to seek justification charge; record lacked evidence of officer unlawful force, so no basis to charge justification |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Brown, 205 N.J. 133 (2011) (defendant's threatening conduct can make a warrantless arrest lawful despite initial defects)
- State v. Branch, 301 N.J. Super. 307 (App. Div. 1997) (resisting arrest requires purposeful awareness that police are effecting an arrest; announcement is one factor)
- State v. Kane, 303 N.J. Super. 167 (App. Div. 1997) (statutory rule that unlawful arrest is not a defense if officer acted under color of authority and announced intent before resistance)
- State v. Dekowski, 218 N.J. 596 (2014) (standards for de novo appellate review of sufficiency challenges)