Almost 25 years ago, New Jersey Supreme Court adopted the Compulsory Joinder Rule. This  judicially created rule was later incorporated into New Jersey’s Criminal Code.  Stated simply, all known offenses evolving from the same criminal episode, must be joined in one trial and, failing that subsequent prosecutions will be barred.

In August 2009, the Appellate Division applied the principle in a case involving a defendant who was charged with multiple offenses relating to the use and possession of a weapon.  The defendant was convicted of a second degree crime involving the possession of a weapon by a person not authorized to have one.  After the verdict, it was learned that the defendant’s perceived disqualification for the possessory offense was not identified in the statute, as a result the trial court was required to enter an acquittal, despite the jury’s verdict.  Thereafter, the government and the defendant’s attorney crafted a plea arrangement where the defendant agree to plea to a third degree offense that was previously dismissed by the government from the indictment that produced the weapons conviction.  As a result of the plea agreement, the defendant was sentenced to a four year term of imprisonment with an 18 month parole disqualifier. 

The defendant later appealed and claimed that his trial attorney failed to provide him with effective assistance of counsel because the lawyer did not tell him that, among other things, the Compulsory Joinder Rule would have barred the crime subject of his plea agreement.  His appeal was successful