Free Initial Consultation · 24 / 7

Recent News

The Evolving Role of Prior Acts of Domestic Violence as Evidence in New Trials

Published: December 26, 2024

Client Reviews

  • Upon reading the success in the reviews of Travis' law firm, I decided to give him a call. That call would be the best, life changing call I ever made. full review

    Milton
  • After receiving a Restraining Order by an ex girlfriend accusing me of harassment which was false, I contacted the law firm. Chris helped to get the case dismissed as quickly as possible ... full review

    Stanley
  • He assured me that he would aggressively try to get this unsubstantiated TRO dismissed as well as the harassment charge. Sure enough he did just that and on such short notice that it left... full review

    a client
New Legislation in New Jersey Would Allow Prosecutors to Introduce Someone’s History of Domestic, Sexual, or Child Abuse as Evidence to Support the State’s Case in a New Domestic Violence Trial.

The Evolving Role of Prior Domestic Violence Offenses as Evidence in New TrialsIn response to the ongoing social concern of domestic violence in New Jersey, legislators recently proposed a bill that may allow a prosecutor to use evidence of a defendant’s prior convictions and offenses to prove that they committed domestic violence in a current case. The questions abound when it comes to the constitutionality of such a proposal, the prejudicial nature of past offenses for a jury, and whether the prioritization of victims over the accused allows state law to override critical rights and protections for those charged with crimes in New Jersey.

New Jersey Rule Against Prior Acts as Evidence

Ordinarily, a defendant’s criminal history is not admissible as evidence to prove a crime. The reasoning is that prosecuting someone based on their character does not prove they committed a specific crime. Character evidence typically prejudices a jury and deprives the defendant of a fair trial guaranteed under the United States Constitution. For that reason, evidence rules prohibit prosecutors from introducing a defendant’s past wrongdoings to prove that their propensity to commit wrongdoings proves that they committed a crime. In the New Jersey Rules of Evidence, Rule 404(b) prohibits using a defendant’s past crimes, wrongs, or acts to prove their “disposition” and that they conformed to that disposition during a specific incident.

When Are Prior Acts, Crimes, or Wrongs Allowed in NJ Criminal Prosecutions?

While evidence of prior crimes, wrongs, or acts to prove that a defendant has a propensity to commit certain bad acts is inadmissible, a prosecutor may use such evidence to show “motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident” (NJ Rules of Evidence, 404(b)(2)). So, when a defendant’s history of domestic violence shows a pattern of abuse, such evidence may be relevant to proving the pattern continued in the context of a specific domestic violence incident. The pattern of abuse is important in a domestic violence action. It demonstrates that domestic violence will occur in the future, and, therefore, the victim needs protection.

Judicial Weighing of Prior Acts: Value Against Prejudice in Domestic Violence Cases

So, when a prosecutor intends to introduce evidence of the defendant’s past bad acts, a judge must balance the weight of the evidence in proving domestic violence occurred on a specific occasion against the prejudicial effect on the defendant, that the defendant is a bad person. Thus, a judge considers the value of the evidence to the jury. The decision-makers must determine whether a defendant’s statements are truthful, and prior convictions may help a jury assess the defendant’s credibility. However, a judge may consider several factors before allowing the jury to hear evidence of past crimes.

A court considers the type of crime and its circumstances when considering a prior crime. For example, a court wants to know if the crime occurred long ago, whether the defendant was very young when they committed it, whether the crime included deceit or other indications of untruthfulness, the criminal sentence, and the defendant’s behavior since the conviction. It also matters if the defendant’s credibility is significant to the crime and the defendant’s testimony is crucial to the current criminal matter.

Prejudicial Weight of Prior Acts of Dishonesty vs. Violence

Crimes involving dishonesty are more likely admissible than crimes of violence, given how a defendant’s criminal history tends to prejudice the jury. In other words, a jury that knows a defendant previously committed domestic violence acts, like the ones before the court, will likely be prejudiced into thinking the defendant committed similar acts in the case under consideration. However, the jury’s job is to look to the facts of the current case to decide guilt or innocence.

Relevance of Prior Restraining Orders

The existence of a prior final restraining order may also be relevant to determining whether the defendant has committed domestic violence and is a danger to the victim. A prior restraining order may be evidence of a pattern of violence against the victim, which may convince the jury to convict the defendant. The evidence may confirm the victim’s story of abuse in the jury’s eyes. Similarly, other violent acts may show a pattern of abuse the accused perpetrated on the victim. So, police reports documenting a domestic violence call, arrests for assault, or witness testimony of past violent or abusive acts may also corroborate the victim’s abuse claim.

Detrimental Effects of Historical Criminal Evidence on Defendants in NJ

The prosecution’s introduction of their criminal history can prove challenging for the defendant. The defense wants to prove that they did not commit domestic violence acts and that they are not violent or abusive. They want to create a favorable impression on the jury. When the jury learns that the defendant was arrested for assault or some other crime, such evidence may leave a wrong impression. As such, they may be less likely to believe the defendant’s story.

Moreover, prior offenses can affect a defendant’s sentence. New Jersey’s sentences are set by law based on the crime. However, a sentence may increase when there are aggravating factors. One aggravating factor is the defendant’s prior convictions, especially for the same crime. So, a defendant charged with kidnapping or criminal restraint may receive a longer sentence when they have prior convictions, especially if the past conviction is for the same crime or another violent offense.

Defense Strategies when Prior Offenses are Involved in a Current NJ Domestic Violence Case

Defense Strategies when Prior Offenses are Involved in a New Jersey Domestic Violence Case 

Challenging Admissibility

Fortunately, defendants are not without defenses. They can challenge the admissibility of the evidence under Rule 404(b) and Rule 403. For example, a defendant’s attorney can argue that certain prior offenses are more prejudicial to the defendant if admitted into evidence than they are probative of a relevant fact to be proved by the state.

Minimizing Prejudice

But even if prior offense evidence is admitted, the defense can show how the defendant has changed since the prior offenses, such as taking anger management classes, seeking counseling, getting employment, or engaging in other conduct that would distance the defendant from the prior offense.

Presenting Counter-Evidence

The defense can also explain the context of the prior offenses. For example, the defendant may have had substance abuse problems that led to fights or other crimes. Presenting such a context or presenting counter-evidence to the prior convictions may give the defendant an opportunity to show a jury how they have changed and improved their life.

A well-presented defense is crucial for an acquittal. Domestic violence acts, like sexual assault or possession of a weapon for an unlawful purpose, can mean that a defendant spends a long time in prison. Therefore, who you hire to defend you against these allegations is also critical.  A well-chosen law firm can challenge the admissibility of prior offense evidence and develop other effective strategies for downplaying or contradicting the prior offense information to minimize its impact.

Hire a Domestic Violence Defense Lawyer with Knowledge of NJ Rules of Evidence to Protect Your Rights

If you are facing domestic violence charges in New Jersey, the attorneys at The Tormey Law Firm have extensive experience handling domestic violence criminal actions. We are well-versed in New Jersey domestic violence laws and the New Jersey Rules of Evidence. Thus, when a prosecutor attempts to introduce past convictions into evidence, our knowledgeable domestic violence defense lawyers may challenge those attempts to ensure that you are not unduly prejudiced and receive a fair trial. Prosecutors will push to introduce prejudicial evidence to get a conviction. So, it is essential that you hire an aggressive representative who can persuade a judge of the imbalance between the evidence’s probative value and its prejudicial effect. Following a thorough review of your case, our attorneys can insist that proving a crime with such evidence is far more likely to create prejudice in a jury and is a violation of our clients’ rights. We may also argue to a judge that the prosecution has other evidence that is less prejudicial to prove their case.

Choosing the right attorney firm for you is essential. We know the stakes and we will handle your domestic violence defense with attention, care, and the strategic approach it deserves. Call (908)-336-5008 to talk to a member of our team today. Consultations are free and available 24/7 for clients in Atlantic, Bergen, Essex, Hudson, Sussex, Union, Monmouth, Middlesex, and Passaic County, and throughout New Jersey.

Filed under: Domestic Violence

Visit Our Offices

With offices in Hackensack, Morristown, Newark, Middletown, and New Brunswick, our lawyers can represent you anywhere in New Jersey and are available immediately to assist you at (908)-336-5008

Hackensack / Bergen County

254 State Street
Hackensack, NJ 07601

  • 201-556-1570
  • 201-556-1572
Hackensack Office

Morristown / Morris County

60 Washington St Suite 200A,
Morristown, NJ 07960

  • 908-336-5008
  • 201-556-1572
Morristown Office

Newark / Essex County

1 Gateway Center Suite 2600
Newark, NJ 07102

  • 201-654-3464
  • 201-556-1572
Newark Office

for a free initial consultation Contact the Tormey Law Firm

Travis J. Tormey is a distinguished member of the legal community and a respected legal resource on domestic violence. He has been featured in a variety of prominent publications and media outlets, including CBS radio, Aol News, the Asbury Park Press, NJ.com, and the Daily Record. Mr. Tormey has also been recognized as one of the the top criminal attorneys under 40 years of age by the National Trial Lawyers Association and the National Academy of Criminal Defense Attorneys. Whether representing victims or the wrongly accused, Travis remains passionately committed to protecting the rights of the innocent.

Areas we serve

The Tormey Law Firm LLC handles restraining order cases in Bergen County (Hackensack), Morris County (Morristown), Passaic County (Paterson), Union County (Elizabeth), Hudson County (Jersey City), Middlesex County (New Brunswick), Somerset County (Somerville), Sussex County (Newton), Essex County (Newark), Hunterdon County (Flemington), Mercer County (Trenton), Monmouth County (Freehold), Warren County (Belvidere), Ocean County (Toms River), Burlington County (Mount Holly), and throughout NJ.

Tell us how we can help

Contacting our office does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Please do not share any confidential information until such a relationship has been established.