Norcross wins as appellate court affirms dismissal of indictment

A state appellate court panel today upheld the dismissal of an indictment against Democratic powerbroker George E. Norcross III and others

The three-judge panel unanimously affirmed a February 2025 ruling by Superior Court Judge Peter Warshaw dismissing the entire indictment against Norcross and all co-defendants.

In a 92-page decision, the appellate court agreed that the alleged conduct did not legally constitute theft by extortion or criminal coercion, finding that hard bargaining, political pressure, litigation threats, and advocacy—without unlawful demands for property—do not satisfy New Jersey’s extortion statutes.  Because extortion was the foundation of the case, all dependent charges collapsed.”

The three judges also agreed that the indictment failed to properly allege a criminal enterprise distinct from lawful political, legal, and business activity – and that routine political influence, lobbying, and redevelopment negotiations—even if aggressive—are not racketeering.

Appellate Court Judges Greta Gooden Brown, Lisa Rose, and Ellen Torregrossa-O’Connor participated in the 3-0 decision.

The decision forces Acting Attorney General Jennifer Davenport to decide whether to let the appellate court’s decision stand or appeal it to the New Jersey Supreme Court.  Davenport has been in office less than two weeks and is preparing to go before the State Senate for a confirmation hearing.

“Our office is reviewing the Appellate Division’s decision,” a spokesperson for the attorney general’s office said this morning.

Today’s decision could be the death knell for the embattled Office of Public Integrity and Accountability, which developed the case against Norcross that led to a 112-page, 13-count racketeering indictment in June 2024.

The appellate court also rejected the state’s evergreen conspiracy theory to get around the statute of limitations.

The court also upheld the dismissal of indictments against Norcross’s co-defendants: his brother, lawyer Philip Norcross; his longtime attorney, Bill Tambussi; former Camden Mayor Dana Redd; former Michaels Organization CEO John O’Donnell; and NFI CEO Sidney Brown.

Warshaw determined that the indictment’s “factual allegations do not constitute extortion or criminal coercion as a matter of law” and found “there was no racketeering enterprise.”  He found that all charges were outside the statute of limitations.

He found that the indictment’s “factual allegations do not constitute extortion or criminal coercion as a matter of law” and found “there was no racketeering enterprise.”  He found that all charges were outside the statute of limitations.

“It follows that if the facts alleged do not, as a matter of law, constitute a crime, the indictment is manifestly deficient and facially and palpably defective,” Warshaw wrote in his decision.   “The indictment must be dismissed because its factual allegations do not constitute extortion or criminal coercion as a matter of law.”

Then-Attorney General Matt Platkin alleged that Norcross strongarmed a Philadelphia real estate developer, Carl Dranoff, into selling them development rights, including a view easement, so they could obtain – and later sell, millions of dollars in tax incentives from the New Jersey Economic Development Authority.