N.J. Bar Association asks appellate court to protect ‘zealous advocacy’ by attorneys

Prosecutors must prove that an attorney knowingly and purposefully took part in a criminal scheme rather than simply offer legal services to someone accused of a crime, the New Jersey State Bar Association said in an amicus brief filed in an appeal involving two politically active lawyers in South Jersey.

The brief was filed in an appellate court as Attorney General Matt Platkin seeks to reverse the dismissal of a racketeering indictment against Democratic powerbroker George E. Norcross and others, including his attorneys.   Superior Court Judge Peter Warshaw dismissed a racketeering indictment in February.

“Issuance of an indictment should require demonstration of a conscious effort—purposeful intentionality — by the attorney to further a criminal enterprise, otherwise the attorney’s conduct in the good faith delivery of legal services to a client should not subject the attorney to criminal charges,” the bar association said in an unusual intervention in a politically-charged matter.

The organization argues that lawyers potentially face prosecution just for representing a controversial client.

“Zealous advocacy should not be limited. Similarly, lawyers acting in good faith can still be duped by the duplicity of clients but should not be indicted for it without the lawyer’s own purposeful intent to further the criminal enterprise,” the bar association maintains. “Absent such a standard, the zealous representation of criminal defendants will be chilled because attorneys would be forced to operate under the threat of criminal liability for engaging in routine legal work.”

The bar association also argues the New Jersey Supreme Court has exclusive jurisdiction over attorney conduct and the ethics standards set for attorneys is sufficient.

Earlier this month, the New Jersey State Committee of the American College of Trial Lawyers has filed an amicus brief asking the appellate division to uphold the dismissal