WeVote
Log In

Bill

RB

Bill

A 1392

Directs Office of Public Defender to provide legal representation for certain criminal contempt violations.

2026-2027 Regular Session Introduced by Rosy Bagolie and 3 co-sponsors

The bill requires the Public Defender to represent indigent defendants charged with contempt for violations of specified domestic-violence protective orders, expanding access to co

Introduced, Referred to Assembly Judiciary Committee
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · A 1392

Bill Summary – New Jersey A-1392 (Session 222)

Basic Overview

  • Jurisdiction: New Jersey
  • Bill Title: An Act concerning representation by the Office of the Public Defender in certain domestic violence contempt violation cases
  • Sponsor(s): Primary sponsor not listed; co-sponsors include Joe Danielsen, Vicky Flynn, Ellen Park, Rosy Bagolie
  • Introduced: January 13, 2026
  • Current Status: Referred to Assembly Judiciary Committee

Purpose and Intent

  • The bill expands the duties of the Office of the Public Defender (OPD) to provide indigent defendants with legal representation in certain contempt violation cases.
  • Specifically, it targets contempt charges arising from violations of orders issued under the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act of 1991 (and substantially similar orders from other states or the U.S.).

Key Provisions and Changes

  • New obligation for OPD: The OPD must represent indigent defendants charged with contempt for violating orders entered under the Domestic Violence Act (and similar orders from other jurisdictions), as directed by the framework of the OPD’s established representation duties (P.L.1967, c.43; C. 2A:158A-1 et seq.).
  • Scope of orders covered: The bill covers contempt for violations of orders issued under the Domestic Violence Act (P.L.1991, c.261; C.2C:25-17 et seq.). It clarifies that:
    • Violations of orders specifically listed as contempt-provoking (e.g., certain provisions in the contempt statute) fall under OPD representation.
    • Orders excluded from OPD representation include violations related to:
    • Parenting time (custody-related provisions)
    • Monetary compensation for losses
    • Professional counseling requirements
    • Rent or mortgage payment requirements
    • In short, some DV orders do not trigger contempt charges and thus would not entitle a defendant to OPD representation under this bill.
  • Legal effect: If a defendant is indigent and charged with contempt for violations of covered DV orders, the OPD must provide defense representation, aligning with existing mandates for indigent defendants charged with crimes or “consequences of magnitude.”

Who is Affected

  • Indigent defendants charged with contempt for violations of domestic-violence protective orders (and substantially similar orders from other jurisdictions) would gain access to public defender representation.
  • Defendants charged with contempt for violations of orders currently listed as excluded (e.g., parenting time, certain monetary/financial obligations, counseling requirements, or housing payment obligations) would not be automatically represented by the OPD under this bill.

Procedural and Timeline Aspects

  • Effective date: The act would take effect immediately upon enactment.
  • Implementation: Requires OPD to adjust practices to ensure representation for eligible indigent defendants consistent with existing statutory framework for public defender services (C. 2A:158A-1 et seq.).

Context and Implications

  • The bill implements Recommendation 29 from the June 2023 Reconvened Joint Committee on Criminal Justice report.
  • It narrows or clarifies the boundary between which DV order violations trigger contempt charges eligible for OPD representation, potentially reducing uninsured or inadequately represented defendants in domestic-violence-related contempt cases.
  • By expanding OPD duties in these specific contempt scenarios, the bill aims to ensure due process for indigent individuals facing contempt sanctions tied to DV orders, while preserving economic and policy considerations by excluding certain administrative/enforcement orders.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.