State v. Hernandez
208 N.J. 24
| N.J. | 2011Background
- Hernandez and Rose were convicted/sentenced on multiple charges arising from separate indictments in two counties (Paterson/Passaic and Ocean County; Linden/Union County).
- Hernandez was in pre-sentence custody when Ocean County charged her with burglary/theft; Ocean County sentenced her to a three-year term concurrent with Passaic County sentence.
- Passaic County Judge awarded jail credits only for time directly attributable to Passaic offenses; credits for Ocean County custody were treated as applied to Ocean County sentence.
- Rose faced multiple CDS and theft offenses across two indictments in a single county with a negotiated plea; sentences were imposed concurrently and consecutively.
- Rule 3:21-8 provides pre-sentence jail credits for time served between arrest and sentence; gap-time credits under N.J.S.A. 2C:44-5(b)(2) apply toward subsequent sentences.
- Court consolidated the cases for decision and remanded for a redetermination consistent with Rule 3:21-8
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Rule 3:21-8 jail credits apply to pre-sentencing custody across multiple charges | Hernandez argues jail credits should cover all pre-sentence custody across counts and counties | State argues jail credits are limited to time directly attributable to the offense and precludes cross-coverage | Yes; jail credits apply to time in custody on all open charges awaiting disposition; remand for re-determination |
| How gap-time credits interact with jail credits in multi-charge/multi-sentence scenarios | Hernandez contends gap-time credits should not preclude jail credits and should be meaningfully applied | State maintains gap-time credits do not reduce parole ineligibility and should follow Booker/Richardson | Gap-time credits do not reduce jail credits; however, when applicable, must be applied consistently; remand for correction of credits allocation |
| Whether the consolidation across counties affects the amount of jail credits awarded | Hernandez argues uniform application of Rule 3:21-8 across counties is required | State argues credits should follow traditional territorial attribution to each sentence | Yes; Rule 3:21-8 must be applied uniformly across concurrent/line-of-sentence scenarios; remand to reallocate credits as needed |
| Whether prior case law interpreting Rule 3:21-8 confronts these facts | Hernandez relies on Hill, Marnin and Booker to argue discretionary crediting | State relies on Richardson and Booker to limit credits to time attributable to the offense and pre-sentence period | Earlier Rule interpretations control; in these circumstances jail credits must be allocated per Rule 3:21-8 with remand for recalculation |
| Does the decision prospectively apply to cases not yet final | Hernandez argues for prospective application due to potential plea and pipeline negotiations | State argues for retroactive consistency with prior interpretations | Remand proceedings limited prospectively for new sentencing conduct; existing direct appeals stay unaffected |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Carreker, 172 N.J. 100 (2002) (addressed jail credits in IAD context and time served in custody opposite separate sentences)
- State v. Black, 153 N.J.438 (1998) (Rule 3:21-8 limits jail credits to confinement attributable to the offense)
- State v. Hemphill, 391 N.J. Super. 67 (App. Div. 2007) (application of jail credits and pre-sentence confinement)
- Richardson v. Nickolopoulos, 110 N.J. 241 (199)) (gap-time credits and their purpose in avoiding manipulation of sentences)
- Booker v. N.J. State Parole Bd., 136 N.J. 257 (1994) (gap-time credits on back end; parole ineligibility treated as absolute term)
- State v. Towey, 114 N.J. 69 (1989) (clarified custodial sentence meaning under Rule 3:21-8)
- State v. Allen, 155 N.J. Super. 582 (App. Div. 1978) (early application of jail credits; direct attribution to offense)
- State v. Marnin, 108 N.J. Super. 442 (App. Div. 1970) (limitations on applying jail credits to unrelated sentences)
- In re Hinsinger, 180 N.J. Super. 491 (App. Div. 1981) (non-custodial confinement exceptions to jail credits)
- State v. Beatty, 128 N.J. Super. 488 (App. Div. 1974) (pre-sentence jail credits across detainers)
- State v. De Rosa, 332 N.J. Super. 426 (App. Div. 2000) (IAD context and jail credits aftermath)