STATE OF NEW JERSEY IN THE INTEREST OF M.P.
A-0303-16T2
In this juvenile delinquency prosecution, the Family Part
sua sponte transferred venue to another vicinage without notice
to the juvenile defendant or the State. When the State
objected, the judge held a hearing and stated the transfer was
occasioned by receipt of a confidential report filed by an
judiciary employee pursuant to Judiciary Employee Policy #5-15,
"Reporting Involvement in Litigation," (effective June 1, 2016)
(the Policy). In a subsequently filed brief statement of
reasons, without identifying the employee or his or her
relationship to the litigation, the judge concluded that given
the employee's access to the Family Automated Case Tracking
System (FACTS), location in the courthouse and interaction with
the public, the Policy required the transfer of venue.
The court granted the juvenile's motion for leave to appeal, which the State supported, and reversed. Our Court Rules presume venue is laid in the county of the juvenile's domicile, a presumption further supported by provisions of the Code of Juvenile Justice. Additionally, the Crime Victim's Bill of Rights require the court to consider the inconvenience to the victim occasioned by the transfer of venue.
While the Family Part Presiding Judge may order the transfer of venue for good cause over the objections of the juvenile and the State, the court must provide notice of its
intention and an opportunity to object beforehand.
Additionally, the court's power must be exercised in service to
the goals of the Policy, i.e., "to maintain [the Judiciary's]
high degree of integrity and to avoid any actual, potential or
appearance of partiality or conflict of interest in the
adjudication or handling of all cases," and the court must
consider whether a less drastic measure, such as "insulating the
[court employee] from the matter," would accomplish these goals.
