FEDERAL CRIMINAL LAWYERS

Hunterdon County Obstructing the Administration of Law Defense Attorneys

You got charged with obstructing the administration of law last week in Hunterdon County, maybe after physically blocking an officer during an arrest in Flemington, or running from police on Route 31 in Readington, or giving a false name during an investigation in Clinton, or interfering with a search in Raritan Township, or hiding evidence or warning a friend about a police investigation. You don’t know if you’re facing disorderly persons charges carrying six months in county jail or fourth-degree charges carrying 18 months in state prison. You don’t understand the “purposely obstructs” requirement under the statute or what conduct actually qualifies as obstruction—whether physical interference alone counts or if verbal statements can also lead to charges. You don’t know whether lying to police counts as obstruction or if your case will be handled in municipal court or at the Hunterdon County Superior Court in Flemington. You’re concerned about a permanent criminal record, worried that a fourth-degree conviction means a felony-level record, and anxious about losing your job or damaging your professional license.

The answer depends on multiple factors including whether you acted with purposeful intent to obstruct, whether the obstruction involved detection or investigation of a crime, whether your conduct was physical or verbal only, and whether the governmental function was actually impaired. Disorderly persons obstruction under N.J.S.A. 2C:29-1 carries up to six months in county jail and a $1,000 fine under N.J.S.A. 2C:43-8, and these cases are handled in the municipal court where the offense occurred—Flemington Municipal Court, Readington Municipal Court, Clinton Municipal Court, or Raritan Township Municipal Court. Fourth-degree obstruction under the same statute carries up to 18 months in state prison and a $10,000 fine under N.J.S.A. 2C:43-6 and N.J.S.A. 2C:43-3, and applies when the defendant obstructs the detection, investigation, or prosecution of a crime—these cases are handled at the Hunterdon County Superior Court in Flemington and prosecuted by the Hunterdon County Prosecutor’s Office.

Thanks for visiting Spodek Law Group. Our founder Todd Spodek earned his Bachelor of Science in Criminal Justice from Northeastern University in Boston and his Juris Doctor from the Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace University in White Plains, New York. During and after college, Todd worked at some of the largest law firms in Boston and New York, first as a file clerk then as a paralegal preparing multi-defendant cases for trial. During law school he was recommended for Moot Court where he successfully argued criminal cases. Todd is a second-generation attorney—Spodek Law Group was originally established in 1976, making it a nearly 50-year-old family-owned criminal defense practice. With over 20 years of experience practicing criminal defense, Todd has handled thousands of tough cases throughout his career and secured numerous acquittals at trial for clients facing the most serious charges including Felony Murder, Depraved Indifference Murder, Assault, Robbery, Menacing, Harassment, and Predatory Sexual Assault. His exceptional work has garnered national media attention—he represented Anna Delvey (Anna Sorokin) in her high-profile grand larceny case that was featured in a Netflix special series released in 2022, represented the juror at the center of Ghislaine Maxwell’s bid for a mistrial, and handled the Faith Walk Ministry case involving over $1.2 million in fraud charges. Todd’s work has been featured in the New York Post, Newsweek, Fox 5, Business Insider, and Bloomberg. Spodek Law Group has received over 700 client reviews reflecting our commitment to exceptional service and results. We’ve represented many, many clients charged with obstructing administration of law in Hunterdon County, especially in the busiest municipalities including Flemington, Readington, Clinton, and Raritan Township, and we’ve achieved many, many successful outcomes including downgraded charges from fourth-degree to disorderly persons, dismissals based on lack of purposeful intent, and acquittals demonstrating that the defendant’s conduct didn’t meet the statutory elements. If you’re reaching out to us—we understand the stakes you’re facing.

Purposeful Obstruction Requirement and What Conduct Qualifies

Under N.J.S.A. 2C:29-1, a person commits obstructing administration of law if he purposely obstructs, impairs, or perverts the administration of law or other governmental function, or prevents or attempts to prevent a public servant from lawfully performing an official function, by means of flight, intimidation, force, violence, physical interference or obstacle, or any independently unlawful act. The “purposely” element requires that you had a conscious objective to obstruct—mere non-cooperation, verbal protests, or spontaneous reactions without intent to obstruct do not satisfy this requirement. Physical interference counts as obstruction—standing in a doorway to prevent police entry, physically blocking an officer from making an arrest, interfering with execution of a search warrant. Flight from police during an investigation or attempted detention qualifies. Providing false information such as giving a fake name, false alibi, or misleading information to misdirect an investigation counts. Hiding or destroying evidence, warning suspects about police presence or investigations, and filing false police reports to misdirect investigations all constitute obstruction. But verbal statements alone—arguing with police, cursing at officers, verbally protesting an arrest—do not constitute obstruction under New Jersey law. You have constitutional rights to refuse to answer questions, refuse consent to search, record police activity, ask to speak with a lawyer, and remain silent—these protected activities cannot form the basis for obstruction charges.

Todd Spodek’s Strategic Approach to Obstruction Defense

In obstruction cases, Todd Spodek employs sophisticated defense strategies honed over two decades of trial work in the most serious criminal cases. He challenges the prosecution’s evidence by questioning whether you acted purposely to obstruct or whether your conduct was a spontaneous reaction without conscious objective to impede the governmental function. He examines whether the alleged obstruction actually impaired the governmental function or was merely annoying to officers—actual impairment is required, not just conduct that frustrated police. He analyzes whether your conduct consisted of verbal statements alone, which generally cannot constitute obstruction under New Jersey law. He investigates whether your actions were independently unlawful or merely non-cooperation—you have no duty to assist police, and passive refusal to help is not obstruction. In Hunterdon County specifically, Todd has handled obstruction cases at the municipal courts in Flemington, Readington, Clinton, and Raritan Township for disorderly persons charges, and at the Superior Court in Flemington for fourth-degree indictable charges prosecuted by the Hunterdon County Prosecutor’s Office. His trial experience in murder, assault, and other serious violent felonies gives him the skills to effectively cross-examine police officers about what actually impeded their functions versus what merely annoyed them—this distinction is critical in obstruction cases. Todd understands that obstruction charges often arise from misunderstandings during high-stress police encounters where defendants didn’t intend to obstruct but their conduct was misinterpreted by officers. Since April 2025, defendants can request expedited New Jersey State Police processing for expungements of obstruction convictions if filed correctly up front under N.J.S.A. 2C:52-2, which reduces wait time for clearing criminal records—but the best outcome is avoiding conviction entirely through aggressive defense strategy challenging whether the prosecution can prove purposeful obstruction beyond reasonable doubt.

Call 212-300-5196.