Vivian Crespo v. Anibal Crespo (A-28-09) __ NJ __ 2-18-10
The Prevention of Domestic Violence Act is constitutional. The appellate panel correctly held that: a) defendant’s argument that the various procedural aspects of the Act violates the NJ Constitution, Article VI, Section 2, Paragraph 3 is without merit; b) that Roe v. Roe required the rejection of defendant’s arguments in respect of the constitutional sufficiency of the preponderance standard brought pursuant to the Act; c) that the preponderance standard, as applied in domestic violence matters, conforms with due process requirements; d) that defendant’s argument that by allowing the seizure of his firearms upon a finding of
domestic violence, the Act permits a deprivation of a person’s second Amendment right to bear arms must be
rejected; e) that defendant’s claim that the Act’s requirement that a final hearing be held within ten days of the
complaint deprived him of due process lacked merit; and f) the right to trial by jury does not attach when the alleged
victim of domestic violence chiefly seeks a restraining order, even if other ancillary relief, such as damages, are
sought.Judgment of the Appellate Division is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed in the thorough opinion of Judge Fisher.
