New Jersey attorney warns of dire consequences for out-of-state warrants

In New Jersey, criminal defense attorney Adam M. Lustberg discusses the serious implications of out-of-state warrants. Such warrants require individuals to appear in the issuing state to face charges, and can often lead to an extradition process if not addressed quickly. Lustberg highlights that these warrants can stem from a variety of issues, including felony charges and missed court appearances, indicating the necessity for a swift legal response to prevent potential detention or damage to one’s legal record. The attorney also emphasizes the urgency with which these issues should be handled, noting that a warrant can lead to immediate arrest during routine situations, like traffic stops. If a person is detained, they may face extradition to the issuing state for legal proceedings. Lustberg strongly advises that individuals should not only respond but also make informed decisions that can protect their future. Engaging a criminal defense attorney immediately can significantly influence the outcome of the situation. Lustberg discusses the legal framework established by New Jersey’s adoption of the Uniform Criminal Extradition Act (UCEA), which reflects the state’s commitment to enforcing the law while ensuring that individuals' rights are upheld. The UCEA outlines the procedures that govern extradition, requiring formal requests from the issuing state to apprehend the accused, followed by a governor's warrant. This legal process is not automatic; rather, it involves careful judicial examination to balance enforcement with protecting the rights of the accused. During an extradition hearing, the individual may contest the legality of the warrant, offer evidence, and argue for dismissal based on potential errors such as mistaken identity. Lustberg also notes that effective legal strategies might include negotiating with authorities in the issuing state. Thus, consulting with experienced legal counsel is crucial for determining whether to voluntarily surrender or to challenge the validity of the warrant, reinforcing the notion that immediate legal intervention is essential when addressing out-of-state warrants.