tn0811christie_412535_07.JPG

In this 2014 photo, Gov. Chris Christie a bill implementing changes to New Jersey's bail system approved by voters. The reforms were supported by Christie and a wide array of groups including the Supreme Court, the state attorney general, the public defender and the ACLU. But the implementation has sparked fights over the ground rules.

(File photo)

TRENTON -- Citing "grave concern" among county prosecutors, New Jersey's attorney general has asked the state's court system to add gun possession and other crimes to the list of offenses for which suspects are automatically recommended to be locked up under the state's new bail system.

The request came just a few months into the new set-up, which has been taking heat from the state's law enforcement community.

And according to letters obtained by NJ Advance Media, it sparked a fight with public defenders and civil liberties advocates, who called the move a knee-jerk reaction and warned tinkering with the system this soon could undermine the reforms.

New Jersey underwent major criminal justice changes in January when it moved away from cash bail toward an arrangement where judges can order defendants jailed based in part on a risk assessment that weighs the suspect's criminal history and the charges they face.

The reforms were meant to ensure violent offenders were locked to await trial while those accused of minor crimes didn't languish in jail just because they couldn't post meager bail amounts.

In its first few weeks, however, those changes have drawn scrutiny from police and some elected officials over cases where defendants were arrested and quickly released because they weren't deemed a threat, only to commit more crimes in short order.

Last week, Jersey City Mayor Steve Fulop and state lawmakers held a press conference to criticize a so-called loophole that allowed those charged with illegal firearms possession to be released into the new Pretrial Services program, in which defendants return home and are subjected to varying degrees of monitoring by court staff.

But the attorney general, Christopher Porrino, is looking to work around the state Legislature to similar ends, asking the administrator of the court system to make a raft of changes in-house.

His Division of Criminal Justice director, Elie Honig, sent an April 7 letter to Judge Glenn Grant, acting administrative director of the courts, requesting tougher pre-trial sanctions for certain crimes, citing cases where defendants accused of brandishing weapons or leading police on dangerous car chases were allowed to walk free until trial.

The new system uses an algorithm called the Public Safety Assessment, or PSA, that measures risk of flight and danger to the community and informs a judge's decision whether to order a defendant released into the monitoring program or held without bail. Certain crimes carry more weight in the PSA and, while the final decision is up to the judge, the most serious offenses come with a presumption of jail.

Prosecutors are now asking the list of crimes in that category be expanded.

Honig said the court should give heavier weight to offenses including unlawful possession of a handgun and eluding police, asking such crimes be classified as "violent" offenses under the PSA and come with the automatic recommendation that the defendant is locked up.

In his letter, Honig cited three gun cases, including one out of Passaic County where a man allegedly pointed a gun at his step-daughter's boyfriend, telling him "I have this for you."

The man, Austin Chagoya, was charged with aggravated assault, making terroristic threats and various weapons offenses, but Pretrial Services recommended he be released with limited monitoring, according to the letter.

Division of Criminal Justice Director Elie Honig.

Honig also cited another case out of Union County, in which a suspect, David Crooks, allegedly led police on a chase in a stolen vehicle that took them across several lanes of traffic, sideways, on a state highway, before he crashed into a road sign and spun out of control.

Crooks was arrested for second-degree eluding, among other charges, but was released on the condition he check in with Pretrial Services every other week, according to the letter.

Yet under the new system, a judge will only consider locking someone up if prosecutors ask them to, and Honig acknowledged that in most of the cases he cited, that request was never made.

In his own letter last week, Alexander Shalom, a senior attorney for the New Jersey chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, wrote it was "particularly peculiar" that prosecutors would cry foul over the release of defendants they never bothered to ask be jailed in the first place.

Honig wrote that was because the defendants' low PSA scores and the recommendations of Pretrial Services "posed significant practical obstacles to detention."

But both Shalom and Joseph Krakora, the state public defender who wrote his own letter to the court, pointed out that such obstacles are frequently overcome. Judges can, and have, order defendants jailed even despite the PSA or Pretrial Services recommendation if they find good reason, they wrote.

It's unclear whether the court will accept the changes prosecutors have recommended. In a statement to NJ Advance Media, Grant said there were "understandable concerns" raised by the attorney general.

"There continues to be a productive dialogue between the courts and the offices of both the attorney general and the public defender to assess all aspects of criminal justice reform and any improvements that might be made through legislation or adjustments to the PSA," Grant said. "However, the legislation authorizing the use of the PSA rightly requires that the evaluations be based upon empirical evidence."

Shalom and Krakora argue the prosecutors' request is "clearly premature" and based on "limited anecdotes."

Preliminary data from the judiciary shows that in the early weeks of bail reform, judges across the state and in most individual counties granted more than half of prosecutors' requests to have defendants locked up.

Statewide, the average was a little more than 54 percent granted versus almost 46 percent denied. But officials caution not to draw conclusions based on the limited data pool of just a few weeks' worth of rulings.

In his letter, Shalom said the new system was imperfect and its tools "are certain to need modifications."

"But we should not be rash," he wrote.

State officials say there aren't more people committing crimes while awaiting trial under the new system than there were under the old one, where a defendant could still post bail and get right back to breaking the law.

"Unfortunately, some defendants will reoffend while on pretrial release regardless of the system in place," Krakora wrote. "At least now the courts are making these decisions based on empirical risk assessment."

S.P. Sullivan may be reached at ssullivan@njadvancemedia.com. Follow him on Twitter. Find NJ.com on Facebook.