N.J. Model Civil Jury Charge 3.20D

3.20 FALSE IMPRISONMENT (FALSE ARREST) (Approved 6/89)

D. POLICE ARREST WITHOUT A WARRANT

A police officer may arrest an individual without a warrant if he/she has a

reasonable basis to believe that a crime is being or has been committed, that the

person to be arrested is committing the crime or has committed it, even though it is

not being committed or has not been committed in the officer's presence, and, after

the arrest, the individual is restrained only for a reasonable period of time before

he/she is taken before a judge or another appropriate public official to obtain a

warrant for the arrest.

So, in deciding whether plaintiff wa s falsely imprisoned, there are two

decisions you have to make.

The first is whether plaintiff has proven, by the greater weight of the

evidence, that defendant intentionally deta ined or restrained plaintiff in his/her

personal liberty or freedom of movement by arresting him/her.

The second decision, assuming you find that defendant did intentionally

restrain plaintiff by an arrest, involves defendant's claim that he/she had a right to

make the arrest and that the confinement was only for a reasonable period of time.

Here, the defendant must prove this to you by the greater weight of the evidence.

So, you must decide, one, whether defenda nt was a police officer when these

events took place; two, if so, whether defendant had a reasonable basis to believe

that the defendant was a po lice officer when these even ts took place; two, if so,

whether defendant had a reasonable basis to believe that the specific crime [insert

type of crime] was being or had been committed; three, if so, whether defendant

also had reasonable or probable cause to believe that plaintiff committed that

crime; and four, if so, did defendant restrain plaintiff only for a reasonable period

of time before bringing plaintiff before a judge or other appropriate public official

to obtain a warrant for the arrest.

A reasonable basis or probable cause must be that the facts and

circumstances known to the officer were those which would lead a reasonably

cautious person to believe that a cr ime was being committed or had been

committed and that the plaintiff had committe d it. It must be more than mere

conjecture or unfounded suspicion. In considering the reasonableness of the

defendant's judgment you may consider that a person acting under the pressures of

being a police officer cannot make decisions with the same precision as a person

making cautious study of the same facts at home while seated in an armchair.

Also, you may consider that an officer of the law has no right to intrude upon the

rights of citizens because the officer has an unfounded hunch that something is

wrong. A police officer is required to fo llow the laws guiding his/her behavior.

[Here discuss facts of arrest and detention].

So, even if you find that the defendant had proper grounds to make such an

arrest, you still must consider whether he/s he restrained the plaintiff only for a

reasonable period of time before he/she could take him/her before a judge or public

official and obtain a warrant for his/her arrest or whether he/she confined the

plaintiff without bringing him/her before the nearest judge or official for a length

of time that was unnecessary under the circumstances. A reasonable time to take

an arrested person before the nearest judge or official would be the time it would

take an ordinary, diligent police officer to do that task under the circumstances that

faced the defendant. The reasonableness of this time would be affected by the

availability of the nearest judge or official considering the location of the arrest, the

time of day or night, the problem of confining the plaintiff, the available means for

reaching a judge or official and any other factors that you might think would have a

bearing on the amount of time. If the defendant imprisoned the plaintiff for an

unreasonable time before bringing him/her to the nearest judge or official, that

would be false imprisonment, even though the initial confinement was proper. If

the confinement is in all respects proper according to the rules as I have explained

them, then you must find for the defenda nt. But if you find that there was a

confinement, and you find that either there was no right to make the arrest or that

the confinement was for an unreasonable period of time, then you must find for the

plaintiff.

[go on to Damages (False Imprisonment (False Arrest)), Charge 8.47C]

(See NOTE TO JUDGE at the end of the Charge 3.20E “Arrest

Without Warrant for Disorderly Persons Offense or Breach of

Peace.)