STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. JERMAINE A. BOWMAN
Annotate this Case(NOTE: The status of this decision is published.)
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE
APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
APPELLATE DIVISION
DOCKET NO. A-1729-06T51729-06T5
STATE OF NEW JERSEY,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
JERMAINE A. BOWMAN,
Defendant-Respondent.
__________________________________________________
Argued June 6, 2007 - Decided
Before Judges Stern, A. A. Rodr guez and
Sabatino.
On appeal from the Superior Court of New
Jersey, Law Division, Camden County,
Indictment No. 1180-03-06.
Laurie A. Corson, Special Deputy Attorney
General, Acting Assistant Prosecutor, argued
the cause for appellant (Joshua M. Ottenberg,
Acting Camden County Prosecutor, attorney;
Ms. Corson, of counsel and on the brief).
Respondent Jermaine A. Bowman did not file a
brief.
PER CURIAM
As in State v. Brown, __ N.J. Super. __ (App. Div. 2007), decided today, the State argues:
THE TRIAL COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION BY
DISMISSING COUNT ONE OF THE INDICTMENT AND
BY BARRING THE CRIMINAL PROSECUTION OF
TERRORISTIC THREATS BASED ON THE FINDINGS
OF THE FAMILY COURT IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
PROCEEDINGS.
In this case, the Family Part dismissed M.B.'s complaint under the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act and vacated the temporary restraining order at the hearing on the final restraining order. A terroristic threat charge stemming from the same incident and embodied in an indictment subsequently returned in the Law Division was dismissed in light of the Family Part's order. Following defendant's guilty plea to and sentencing on weapons offenses, the State appeals from the order of dismissal.
The defendant presents no brief on the appeal, the record reflects no involvement by the Prosecutor's Office in the domestic violence proceeding in the Family Part, and jeopardy never attached on the dismissed count. Accordingly, we reverse the dismissal of the count of the indictment charging terroristic threats, and remand for prosecution in light of State v. Brown, __ N.J. Super. __ (App. Div. 2007), decided today.
Reversed.
(continued)
(continued)
2
A-1729-06T5
July 11, 2007
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.