Civil Model Jury Charge 3.20 E. ARREST WITHOUT WARRANT FOR DISORDERLY PERSON'S OFFENSE OR BREACH OF PEACE FALSE IMPRISONMENT (FALSE ARREST)
1
It
is the law of this State that a person--whether a private citizen or a police
officer — may arrest another person without a warrant if the arrested person
has [committed what is called a
disorderly person's offense] [violated a municipal ordinance involving a breach
of the peace] in the arresting person's presence and if the arrested person
is then taken to a judge or court clerk located in the county where the arrest
took place without any unnecessary delay.
The offense for which it
was alleged that the defendant arrested the plaintiff was [a disorderly person's offense] [a violation of a municipal ordinance
involving a breach of peace]. This
is an offense for which an arrest may be made without a warrant.
So, in deciding whether
plaintiff was falsely imprisoned, there are two decisions you have to make.
The first is that
plaintiff must prove, by the greater weight of the evidence, that defendant
intentionally detained or restrained plaintiff in his/her personal liberty or
freedom of movement by arresting him/her.
The second, assuming you
find that defendant did intentionally restrain plaintiff by an arrest, involves
defendant's claim that he/she had a right to make the arrest and that, after
the arrest, plaintiff was taken before a judge or court clerk to obtain a
warrant without any unnecessary delay.
[Here discuss facts of arrest and detention].
If you find that there
was an arrest, then defendant must prove to you by the greater weight of the
evidence that the offense, for which the arrest is said to have been made, was
committed in defendant's presence. Even
if you find that the offense was committed in the defendant's presence and,
because of that, he/she arrested the plaintiff, you still must consider whether
he/she restrained the plaintiff only for a reasonable period of time until the
defendant could bring him/her to a judge or court clerk or whether he/she confined
the plaintiff for a length of time that was unnecessary under the
circumstances. A reasonable time for
confinement under the circumstances is the time that an ordinarily cautious
person would take to bring the plaintiff before a judge or court clerk in the
situation that faced the defendant. The
reasonableness of this time would be affected by the availability of the judge
or court clerk, the location of the arrest, the time of day or night, the
problem of confining the plaintiff, available means for reaching the judge or
court clerk and any other factors that you might think had bearing on the
amount of time. If the defendant
imprisoned the plaintiff for an unreasonable time, then even though the
original arrest was proper, the unreasonable delay would be false imprisonment. If the arrest was proper and the confinement
reasonable according to the rules I have explained, then you must find for the
defendant. But if you find that there
was a confinement, and you find that either there was no right to make the
arrest or that there was an unnecessary delay in bringing plaintiff before a
local judge or court clerk, then you must find for the plaintiff.
[go on to Damages (False Imprisonment),
Charge 3.14G]
NOTE TO JUDGE
The
right of law enforcement officers to arrest without a warrant exists when a
felony has been committed in his/her presence or when he/she has a reasonable
basis to believe that a felony is being or has been committed, and when he/she
has a reasonable basis to believe that the person to be arrested is committing
or has committed the felony. State v.
Doyle, 40 N.J. 320 (1963). See also State v. Crawley, 90 N.J.
241 (1982). A felony corresponds to a
crime for which a person may be incarcerated for more than one year in a State
prison as indicated supra.
The
authority for a law enforcement officer's warrantless arrest for offenses of
lesser gravity than a crime is the same as for the citizen as prescribed by the
statutes quoted above. An officer may
make a warrantless arrest for a disorderly persons offense supra. he/she may also arrest a shoplifter or detain
a person whom he/she reasonably believes is willfully concealing unpurchased
merchandise. N.J.S.A. 2C:20-11, supra.
A law
enforcement officer further has the right to make a warrantless arrest when
he/she observes a violation of the motor vehicle laws. N.J.S.A. 39:5-25. And he/she may make reasonable detention
pursuant to his/her administration of these laws. See
Atty. Gen. F.O. 314 (1958); Pine v. Olzewski, supra.
A
police officer may not only apprehend an individual for committing a disorderly
persons offense but may also apprehend that individual for violating a
municipal ordinance involving a breach of the peace offense. An arrest without a warrant for a violation
of a municipal ordinance may be made where the offense is committed upon view
of the officer and the offender must be either a disorderly person or have
committed a breach of the peace. See State v. Hurtado, 219 N.J.
Super. 12 (App. Div. 1987), reversed
o.b., 113 N.J. 1 (1988).
Even
when an arrest is justified, these common law and statutory rights are not
licenses to exercise an unlimited detention.
A law enforcement officer may not detain a person for an unreasonable
time, after arrest, without taking him/her before the nearest magistrate. Cannon v. Krakowitch, 54 N.J. Super. 93 (App. Div. 1959).
A
private citizen has the same duty as a law enforcement officer to take the
arrested party before a magistrate within a reasonable time. See
State v. Ferraro, 81 N.J. Super. 214 (Cty. Ct. 1963); Nelson
v. Eastern Airlines, Inc., 128 N.J.L. 46 (E. & A. 1942); Jackson
v. Miller, 84 N.J.L. 189 (Sup. Ct. 1913); N.J.S.A. 2A:169-3.
If the
arrest by the law enforcement officer is made with a warrant based on proper complaint
being made and a hearing held before a magistrate, then an action for false
arrest cannot be maintained. Gierman
v. Toman, 77 N.J. Super. 18 (Law Div. 1962); Baldwin v.
Pt. Pleasant Beach and Surf Club, 3 N.J. Super. 284 (Law Div.
1949).
It is
interesting to note that even if the arrest should prove illegal, a private
citizen has no right to use force to resist arrest against one he/she knew or
had reason to know was an authorized police officer engaged in the performance
of his/her duties. State v. Koonce,
89 N.J. Super. 169 (App. Div. 1965). See
also State v. Lawrence, 142 N.J. Super. 208 (App. Div.
1976). In such a situation, a defendant
law officer may be able to avail himself/herself of a counterclaim for assault
and battery.
