Jail credit in Municipal Court
Rule 3:21-8 states that “[the defendant shall receive credit on the term of a custodial sentence for any time served in custody in jail or in a state hospital between arrest and the imposition of sentence.” These credits for pre-sentence custody are referred to as “jail credits.” State v. Rawls, 219 N.J. 185, 192 (2014). “When the Rule preconditions for the application of jail credits are satisfied, the award of such credits is mandatory, not discretionary.” State v. Hernandez, 208 N.J. 24 (2011)
, 208 N.J. at 37.
InHernandezthe Court departed from the traditional attribution analysis for determining the correct application of jail credit. The court clarified that defendants are entitled to precisely what the Rule provides: credits against all sentences for any time served in custody in jail or in a state hospital between arrest and the imposition of sentence on each case. Hernandez, supra, 208 N.J. at 28 (quoting R. 3:21-8).
The court applied credits to the Hernandez defendants in a manner that maximized the effect of the credits on their aggregate imprisonment terms and parole ineligibility periods. Id. at 46-49.2 [As interpreted by Hernandez, Rule 3:21-8 requires that a defendant receive jail credit even though the charges are not directly responsible for his or her incarceration. Rawls, supra, 219 N.J. at 194. The court reasoned that such an application of jail credit best comports with the policy goals of facilitating fundamental fairness, discouraging gamesmanship by prosecutors and defendants, and promoting uniformity in sentencing. Hernandez, supra, 208 N.J. at 46-49.
InHernandez,the court also discussed the previous holdings in Black and Carreker. Id. at 42-45. The court held that the facts of those cases were distinguishable because they concerned matters in which the defendants were seeking jail credit while already serving custodial sentences. Id. at 45.
“Jail credits are ‘day-for-day credits.’ ” Ibid. (quoting Buncie v. Dep't of Corr., 382 N.J. Super. 214, 217 (App. Div. 2005), certif. denied, 186 N.J. 606 (2006)). Jail credits apply to the “ ‘front end’ of a defendant's sentence.
The NJ Supreme Court recognizes that jail credits “serve important policy goals.” Rawls, supra, 219 N.J. at 193. Specifically, jail credits further equal protection and fundamental fairness considerations by preventing the “double punishment” of defendants who spend time in custody prior to sentencing. Ibid. (quoting Hernandez, supra, 208 N.J. at 36). Jail credits thereby prevent indigent defendants who cannot afford to post bail from serving greater time in custody than wealthier defendants. Ibid. In addition, jail credits discourage prosecutors from manipulating trial dates and promote uniformity in sentencing. Hernandez, supra, 208 N.J. at 48-49.
In Hernandez, supra, the Court held that, under Rule 3:21-8, defendants are entitled to jail credit “against all sentences ‘for any time served in custody in jail or in a state hospital between arrest and the imposition of sentence’ on each case.” Id. at 28 (emphasis added) (quoting R. 3:21-8). “Therefore, as interpreted by Hernandez, Rule 3:21-8 requires that a defendant receive jail credit even though the charges are not directly responsible for his or her incarceration.” Rawls, supra, 219 N.J. at 194.
