24/7 call for a free consultation 212-300-5196

AS SEEN ON

EXPERIENCEDTop Rated

YOU MAY HAVE SEEN TODD SPODEK ON THE NETFLIX SHOW
INVENTING ANNA

When you’re facing a federal issue, you need an attorney whose going to be available 24/7 to help you get the results and outcome you need. The value of working with the Spodek Law Group is that we treat each and every client like a member of our family.

NJ Brimage Guidelines

NJ Brimage Guidelines

If you’ve been charged with a drug crime in New Jersey, you’ve probably heard about something called the “Brimage Guidelines.” But what exactly are they and how could they impact your case? This article will break down everything you need to know about New Jersey’s Brimage Guidelines for drug crimes sentencing.

The Brimage Guidelines lay out mandatory minimum prison sentences for certain drug offenses in NJ. They were created back in the 1980s and ’90s during the “War on Drugs” era to bring uniformity to drug crime sentencing across the state. The guidelines get their name from State v. Brimage, a 1994 case that upheld their constitutionality.

Since then, the Brimage Guidelines have been modified over the years but remain in use today. Understanding these sentencing rules is crucial for anyone facing drug charges like possession, distribution, or intent to distribute narcotics in New Jersey. Let’s take a closer look at how Brimage works.

Background of the Brimage Guidelines

New Jersey’s Brimage Guidelines were established in 1987 under Attorney General W. Cary Edwards. The goal was to create consistent sentencing policies for drug crimes across all 21 NJ counties. Before Brimage, sentencing varied widely depending on the judge and jurisdiction.

The original Brimage Guidelines document laid out mandatory minimum prison terms based on the type and quantity of drug involved. It also considered factors like a defendant’s role in the offense and prior criminal history.

Over the years, there have been some revisions to the Brimage Guidelines:

  • In 1988, the guidelines were updated to include mandatory parole ineligibility periods.
  • A 1991 update established mandatory fines in addition to prison time.
  • The guidelines were expanded in 1999 to cover more drug crimes like maintaining a drug production facility.
  • A 2004 revision allowed more judicial discretion to impose sentences below the mandatory minimums.

But the core framework of linking mandatory sentences to drug amounts and other factors has remained largely unchanged over 35+ years. The Brimage Guidelines are still cited in courtrooms across New Jersey today.

Christine Twomey
Christine Twomey
2024-03-21
Just had my Divorce case settled 2 months ago after having a horrible experience with another firm. I couldn’t be happier with Claire Banks and Elizabeth Garvey with their outstanding professionalism in doing so with Spodek Law Group. Any time I needed questions answered they were always prompt in doing so with all my uncertainties after 30 yrs of marriage.I feel from the bottom of my heart you will NOT be disappointed with either one. Thanks a million.
Brendan huisman
Brendan huisman
2024-03-18
Alex Zhik contacted me almost immediately when I reached out to Spodek for a consultation and was able to effectively communicate the path forward/consequences of my legal issue. I immediately agreed to hire Alex for his services and did not regret my choice. He was able to cover my case in court (with 1 day notice) and not only was he able to push my case down, he carefully negotiated a dismissal of the charge altogether. I highly recommend Spodek, and more specifically, Alex Zhik for all of your legal issues. Thanks guys!
Guerline Menard
Guerline Menard
2024-03-18
Thanks again Spodek law firm, particularly Esq Claire Banks who stood right there with us up to the finish line. Attached photos taken right outside of the court building and the smile on our faces represented victory, a breath of fresh air and satisfaction. We are very happy that this is over and we can move on with our lives. Thanks Spodek law 🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼🙌🏼❤️
Keisha Parris
Keisha Parris
2024-03-15
Believe every single review here about Alex Z!! From our initial consultation, it was evident that Alex possessed a profound understanding of criminal law and a fierce dedication to his clients rights. Throughout the entirety of my case, Alex exhibited unparalleled professionalism and unwavering commitment. What sets Alex apart is not only his legal expertise but also his genuine compassion for his clients. He took the time to thoroughly explain my case, alleviating any concerns I had along the way. His exact words were “I’m not worried about it”. His unwavering support and guidance were invaluable throughout the entire process. I am immensely grateful for Alex's exceptional legal representation and wholeheartedly recommend his services to anyone in need of a skilled criminal defense attorney. Alex Z is not just a lawyer; he is a beacon of hope for those navigating the complexities of the legal system. If you find yourself in need of a dedicated and competent legal advocate, look no further than Alex Z.
Taïko Beauty
Taïko Beauty
2024-03-15
I don’t know where to start, I can write a novel about this firm, but one thing I will say is that having my best interest was their main priority since the beginning of my case which was back in Winter 2019. Miss Claire Banks, one of the best Attorneys in the firm represented me very well and was very professional, respectful, and truthful. Not once did she leave me in the dark, in fact she presented all options and routes that could possibly be considered for my case and she reinsured me that no matter what I decided to do, her and the team will have my back and that’s exactly what happened. Not only will I be liberated from this case, also, I will enjoy my freedom and continue to be a mother to my first born son and will have no restrictions with accomplishing my goals in life. Now that’s what I call victory!! I thank the Lord, My mother, Claire, and the Spodek team for standing by me and fighting with me. Words can’t describe how grateful I am to have the opportunity to work with this team. I’m very satisfied, very pleased with their performance, their hard work, and their diligence. Thank you team!
Anthony Williams
Anthony Williams
2024-03-12
Hey, how you guys doing? Good afternoon my name is Anthony Williams I just want to give a great shout out to the team of. Spodek law group. It is such a honor to use them and to use their assistance through this whole case from start to finish. They did everything that they said they was gonna do and if it ever comes down to it, if I ever have to use them again, hands-down they will be the first law office at the top of my list, thank you guys so much. It was a pleasure having you guys by my side so if you guys ever need them, do not hesitate to pick up the phone and give them a call.
Loveth Okpedo
Loveth Okpedo
2024-03-12
Very professional, very transparent, over all a great experience
Bee L
Bee L
2024-02-28
Amazing experience with Spodek! Very professional lawyers who take your case seriously. They treated me with respect, were always available, and answered any and all questions. They were able to help me very successfully and removed a huge stress. Highly recommend.
divesh patel
divesh patel
2024-02-24
I can't recommend Alex Zhik and Spodek Law Firm highly enough for their exceptional legal representation and personal mentorship. From the moment I engaged their services in October 2022, Alex took the time to understand my case thoroughly and provided guidance every step of the way. Alex's dedication to my case went above and beyond my expectations. His expertise, attention to detail, and commitment to achieving the best possible outcome were evident throughout the entire process. He took the time to mentor me, ensuring I understood the legal complexities involved to make informed decisions. Alex is the kind of guy you would want to have a beer with and has made a meaningful impact on me. I also want to acknowledge Todd Spodek, the leader of the firm, who played a crucial role in my case. His leadership and support bolstered the efforts of Alex, and his involvement highlighted the firm's commitment to excellence. Thanks to Alex Zhik and Todd Spodek, I achieved the outcome I desired, and I am incredibly grateful for their professionalism, expertise, and genuine care. If you're in need of legal representation, look no further than this outstanding team.

How the Brimage Guidelines Work

The Brimage Guidelines provide a detailed formula to calculate the mandatory minimum sentence for certain drug crimes in NJ. Here are some key factors:

Type and Quantity of Drug

The guidelines assign drugs to different “schedules” based on factors like potential for abuse and accepted medical use. The schedules are:

  • Schedule I: Heroin, LSD, ecstasy, marijuana, etc.
  • Schedule II: Cocaine, methamphetamine, fentanyl, oxycodone, etc.
  • Schedule III: Ketamine, anabolic steroids, testosterone, etc.
  • Schedule IV: Xanax, Valium, Ambien, etc.
  • Schedule V: Cough medicines with limited amounts of narcotics.

The guidelines provide sentencing ranges based on the schedule and the weight or quantity of the drug involved. For example, possession of 5-10 ounces of Schedule I substances like heroin carries a mandatory minimum sentence of 4-8 years in prison.

Role in the Offense

The guidelines make distinctions based on whether the defendant was a leader/organizer or a low-level participant in the drug activity. Leaders face longer mandatory minimum sentences.

Location

Enhanced penalties apply if drug crimes occur in certain protected areas like school zones, public housing, or public parks.

Criminal History

Those with prior felony convictions may be subject to extended term sentencing under Brimage. The standard sentencing ranges are doubled for certain repeat drug offenders.

As you can see, the guidelines aim to provide structured sentencing based on the circumstances of each case. But some exceptions do apply, which leads us to…

Exceptions and Judicial Discretion

While the Brimage Guidelines mandate minimum sentences for many drug crimes, judges do still have some discretion in certain cases:

  • If a defendant provides “substantial assistance” to law enforcement, they may receive a reduced sentence.
  • Those with minimal criminal histories may qualify for a waiver of the mandatory minimum term.
  • Judges can impose a sentence below the guidelines if they find a “serious injustice” would occur.
  • Youthful offenders under age 26 may be eligible for lower sentences.

So while Brimage sets the baseline, there are still opportunities for judicial discretion in sentencing. An experienced criminal defense attorney can advise if any mitigating factors apply to your specific situation.

How Brimage Impacts Plea Bargaining

Since the Brimage Guidelines set mandatory minimums, they also influence the plea bargaining process in drug cases. Prosecutors may offer a plea deal that reduces the charges to avoid long mandatory sentences. But any plea deal still has to comply with the applicable Brimage terms.

Some options prosecutors may consider include:

  • Amending the drug type or weight to lower the mandatory minimum.
  • Dropping the school zone or other enhancers.
  • Downgrading the role in the offense from leader to low-level participant.
  • Charging possession only rather than possession with intent to distribute.

An experienced drug crimes lawyer can advise if any plea bargain options are on the table to avoid the full impact of the Brimage Guidelines in your case.

Criticisms and Attempts at Reform

While designed to create uniformity, the Brimage Guidelines have drawn criticism on a few fronts over the years:

  • Disparate impact: The mandatory sentences fall disproportionately on minorities and the poor.
  • Net-widening: More defendants are getting caught in the criminal justice system due to broad applicability.
  • Inflexibility: Mandatory minimums reduce judicial discretion and individualized justice.
  • Questionable deterrent effect: No clear evidence the guidelines are reducing drug crimes.

Some reform advocates have argued New Jersey should follow the example of other states that have rolled back mandatory minimum sentencing schemes. There have been attempts to relax the Brimage Guidelines over the years, but major changes have failed to pass the legislature.

While Brimage has its detractors, it remains the law governing drug sentencing in New Jersey for now. But the calls for reform likely will continue in the future.

Finding an Experienced Attorney

As you can see, New Jersey’s Brimage Guidelines can have profound impacts on drug crime sentences. If you or a loved one are facing charges like possession with intent or distribution, it’s critical to have an experienced criminal defense lawyer on your side.

A knowledgeable attorney can advise how the Brimage Guidelines apply to your specific case. They can also negotiate with prosecutors for any available plea bargain options. And if necessary, they can argue for exceptions or waivers under Brimage if mitigating factors exist.

Don’t leave your fate to chance. The stakes are high, with long-term mandatory minimum prisons terms on the line. Consult an attorney today to discuss your best defense strategy when facing drug crimes under New Jersey’s complex Brimage Guidelines.

Schedule Your Consultation Now