State of New Jersey v. Carlos Bolvito

Summary

The Supreme Court of New Jersey held that a Sex Crime Victim Treatment Fund penalty is mandatory for a defendant convicted of a qualifying sex offense, but that the amount may range from a nominal figure to the statutory maximum. In setting the amount, the sentencing court should consider the nature of the offense and the defendant’s ability to pay during incarceration and after release, and must provide a statement of reasons. The court reversed and remanded for reconsideration of the penalty imposed on Carlos Bolvito.

Holdings

1. When a defendant is convicted of an offense listed in N.J.S.A. 2C:7-2, the sentencing court must impose an SCVTF penalty and has no discretion to dispense with it.
2. For each offense degree, the amount stated in N.J.S.A. 2C:14-10 is a ceiling, not a floor; a sentencing court may impose any amount from a nominal figure up to the applicable statutory maximum.
3. When setting an SCVTF penalty within the statutory range, the sentencing court should consider both the nature of the offense and the defendant's ability to pay during incarceration and after release, assessing ability to pay over the long term.
4. A sentencing court should provide a statement of reasons when setting an SCVTF penalty within the statutory parameters.

Questions Presented

1. Whether an SCVTF penalty under N.J.S.A. 2C:14-10 is mandatory when a defendant is convicted of a qualifying sex offense.
2. Whether the statutory amounts in N.J.S.A. 2C:14-10 are ceilings or instead establish minimum and maximum ranges by offense degree.
3. Whether a sentencing court may or should consider a defendant's ability to pay when setting the amount of an SCVTF penalty.
4. Whether the sentencing court must state reasons for the amount of an SCVTF penalty imposed within the statutory range.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded