Can You Be Charged for Not Reporting a Fire in New Jersey?

In New Jersey, the threat of fire is a constant and significant reality. In a single recent year, the state recorded over 25,000 fires, which translates to a new fire incident approximately every 20 minutes. Nationally, law enforcement agencies reported over 34,000 incidents of arson in 2023.

Beyond structural fires, New Jersey’s densely populated landscape, where neighborhoods often border wooded areas, faces an average of 1,500 wildfires annually, most caused by human activity. These statistics highlight how frequently fires occur and the serious risk they pose to both life and property in the Garden State.

New Jersey law has provisions that make not reporting a dangerous fire a criminal offense and the consequences of a conviction can be life-altering. If you’re facing allegations under New Jersey’s arson statute, speaking with an experienced arson lawyer can make all the difference. At Lustberg Law Offices, LLC, top-rated New Jersey arson lawyer Adam M. Lustberg has extensive experience handling arson-related charges and can help protect your rights at every stage of the process. Call (201) 880-5311 to schedule a confidential consultation and begin building your defense.

Deconstructing N.J.S.A. 2C:17-1c, “Failure to Control or Report a Dangerous Fire”

New Jersey Statute § 2C:17-1c addresses a unique form of criminal liability that stems not from direct action, but from inaction in the face of a known danger. This provision is part of the broader arson statute, which encompasses serious crimes like aggravated arson and arson-for-hire. However, subsection (c) focuses on a different scenario, when someone fails to respond appropriately to a fire that presents a clear risk to life or property.

The statute reads:

“A person who knows that a fire is endangering life or a substantial amount of property of another and either fails to take reasonable measures to put out or control the fire, when he can do so without substantial risk to himself, or to give prompt fire alarm, commits a crime of the fourth degree if:

(1) He knows that he is under an official, contractual, or other legal duty to prevent or combat the fire; or

(2) The fire was started, albeit lawfully, by him or with his assent, or on property in his custody or control.”

This law imposes a conditional legal duty to act. It applies in specific situations where a person has knowledge of a dangerous fire and is in a position either of responsibility or control. Unlike more active forms of arson, this statute focuses on a failure to intervene, either by not taking reasonable steps to extinguish the fire or by failing to promptly alert authorities.

The offense is a fourth-degree crime under New Jersey law, which makes it an indictable offense (comparable to a felony in other jurisdictions). A conviction can carry up to 18 months in prison and result in a permanent criminal record, even if no one is physically harmed by the fire.

There are two core failures that the statute penalizes:

• Failing to take reasonable measures to extinguish or control the fire.
• Failing to give a prompt fire alarm (e.g., not calling 911).

However, the statute includes a critical safety qualifier. It does not require individuals to act if doing so would pose a substantial risk to their own safety. This safeguard reflects a legislative intent to avoid criminalizing self-preservation. The duty arises only when a person can safely intervene, meaning reasonable action is expected only under non-dangerous conditions.

Notably, this law is not a general duty-to-rescue statute, which New Jersey does not impose broadly. Instead, it narrowly targets situations involving fire hazards, where the stakes can escalate rapidly and the consequences of silence or inaction can be dire.

New Jersey Arson Lawyer Adam M. Lustberg

The Prosecutor’s Burden: The Three-Part Test for a Conviction

To convict someone under N.J.S.A. 2C:17-1c for Failure to Control or Report a Dangerous Fire, the State must do more than show that the person was near a fire and did nothing. The burden is high, as the prosecutor must prove three specific elements beyond a reasonable doubt. These elements are defined in New Jersey’s Model Criminal Jury Charges, the guidelines judges use to instruct juries during criminal trials. Each element plays a distinct role in establishing criminal liability, and understanding this framework reveals how such cases are analyzed and defended in court.

Element 1: The Defendant Knew a Fire Was Endangering Life or Property

The first element focuses on the defendant’s mental state. The State must prove that the individual had actual knowledge of a fire that was endangering life or another person’s property. This is a subjective standard; proof of mere negligence or carelessness is not enough.

According to N.J.S.A. 2C:2-2, a person acts “knowingly” when they are aware of their conduct and the surrounding circumstances, or are aware of a high probability that those circumstances exist. In practical terms, the prosecutor must demonstrate that the defendant was aware of the fire and its dangerous nature.

Since knowledge is internal and cannot be observed directly, jurors are allowed to infer it from circumstantial evidence. The defendant’s behavior, location, and even things they said or failed to say can contribute to that inference. For instance, if a person was seen backing away from the fire or giving verbal cues about its danger, that conduct could support a finding that they knew of the threat.

Element 2: The Defendant Failed to Act Reasonably

Once the State establishes knowledge, it must then show that the defendant failed to take one of two legally required actions:

• The defendant did not take reasonable steps to extinguish or control the fire, when doing so would not have posed a substantial personal risk; or
• The defendant did not promptly raise a fire alarm.

What counts as “reasonable measures” or “prompt” action is a fact-driven inquiry. A jury must consider what a reasonable person in the defendant’s position would have done, accounting for the specific circumstances, such as physical ability, proximity to the fire, and available resources. A young, healthy adult may be expected to act differently than an elderly or mobility-impaired individual.

The statute also builds in a key limitation: if any action would have involved substantial risk, such as exposure to flames, smoke, or collapsing structures, the law does not require the person to intervene physically. In such cases, the duty to act shifts to calling for help. A phone call to 911, made without delay, may satisfy the requirement to give a prompt fire alarm.

Element 3: A Legal Duty or Responsibility Existed

The final element is the legal trigger that activates the obligation to act. The law does not impose liability for failure to act unless the person had a recognized legal duty. The State must prove one of two scenarios:

• The defendant was under an “official, contractual, or other legal duty” to prevent or combat the fire; or
• The fire originated from the defendant’s own conduct, was started with their permission, or occurred on property under their control.

The first scenario involves those with established responsibilities. An “official” duty may apply to firefighters or public safety officers. A “contractual” duty might apply to individuals like security guards, superintendents, or maintenance staff, whose job duties include fire prevention or emergency response.

The more ambiguous term is “other legal duty.” This can create legal uncertainty, as it may be interpreted to include obligations found in other areas of law, such as civil liability for property owners. New Jersey premises liability law, for example, requires property owners to maintain reasonably safe conditions for visitors. Prosecutors could use that doctrine to argue that a property owner who fails to report or control a fire violates this criminal statute, introducing complex civil law concepts into a criminal trial.

The second scenario is broader and easier to apply. It captures situations where a person had some control or connection to the fire’s origin or location. This includes:

• Fires lawfully started by the defendant, such as a fire pit or grill that becomes unmanageable.
• Fires started by others, but with the defendant’s permission.
• Fires occurring on property the defendant controlled—whether owned, rented, or temporarily managed.

Each of these elements: knowledge, failure to act, and legal duty, must be proven individually. The absence of any one is a complete defense, and the jury is instructed accordingly. This three-part test provides both the structure for prosecution and the roadmap for defense.

The Consequences: Penalties for a Fourth-Degree Conviction

Although Failure to Control or Report a Dangerous Fire is classified as a fourth-degree crime, the lowest degree under New Jersey’s arson statute, a conviction is far from minor. The penalties are severe, and their impact often stretches well beyond the courtroom, affecting nearly every aspect of a person’s future.

Imprisonment

A conviction for a fourth-degree crime in New Jersey can result in a sentence of up to 18 months in state prison. While first-time offenders are generally presumed eligible for non-incarceration, that presumption is not absolute. A judge may still impose a custodial sentence if the circumstances of the case, such as danger to the public or prior conduct, justify it. The decision rests heavily on how the facts are argued during sentencing, and whether the offense is seen as part of a broader pattern of recklessness or disregard for safety.

Fines

The court may impose a financial penalty of up to $10,000. This amount does not include other court-related costs or surcharges that may be assessed as part of the sentencing package.

Restitution

In cases where property damage occurred, the court can order restitution to compensate victims for their losses. This may include the cost of repairing or replacing damaged structures or personal belongings. Depending on the extent of the fire’s destruction, the restitution figure can be financially overwhelming.

A Permanent Felony Record

Perhaps the most lasting consequence is the creation of a permanent felony record. A fourth-degree crime in New Jersey is an indictable offense, comparable to a felony in other states. What makes this particular charge even more serious is that it falls under the arson statute. Convictions under N.J.S.A. 2C:17-1 are specifically excluded from expungement under state law. That means the record cannot be cleared or sealed, even years later, no matter the individual’s rehabilitation or contributions to society.

This non-expungeable felony conviction can have profound collateral consequences:

• Employment: Many employers conduct background checks, and a felony conviction may automatically disqualify a candidate, especially for roles involving public trust, financial responsibility, or child and elder care.
• Housing: Landlords often deny rental applications based on criminal history, making access to stable housing more difficult.
• Professional Licenses: Individuals in regulated professions, such as healthcare, law, education, or real estate, may lose their license or be barred from obtaining one.
• Civil Rights: A felony conviction can affect constitutional rights, including the right to own or possess firearms.

Taken together, these penalties make it clear that a conviction for this fourth-degree offense is anything but minor. The law’s prohibition against expungement means the repercussions will persist indefinitely. As such, the defense strategy must be proactive and focused on avoiding conviction altogether, not merely seeking leniency at sentencing. The long-term impact of even a “low-level” arson-related charge underscores the high stakes involved.

Area of Impact	How It’s Affected	Examples
Employment	Background checks often disqualify candidates with a felony, especially for sensitive roles.	Public trust positions, financial sector jobs, child or elder care roles.
Housing	Landlords may reject rental applications due to criminal history.	Denial of rental units, difficulty securing leases in competitive markets.
Professional Licenses	Many regulated professions prohibit or revoke licenses after a felony.	Healthcare licenses, teaching certifications, law licenses, real estate licenses.
Civil Rights	Certain constitutional rights may be limited or revoked.	Loss of firearm possession rights, limitations on voting in some jurisdictions.

Building Your Defense: How to Fight a “Failure to Report” Charge in NJ

Being charged under N.J.S.A. 2C:17-1c for Failure to Control or Report a Dangerous Fire does not mean conviction is inevitable. The burden of proof lies entirely with the prosecution, which must demonstrate each element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. A well-crafted defense doesn’t rely on broad, boilerplate strategies, instead, it dissects the statute and targets the most vulnerable parts of the State’s case. This tailored approach allows defense attorneys to undermine the prosecution’s arguments with precision.

Challenging Element 1 (Knowledge): “I Didn’t Know”

The statute’s first requirement is knowledge; specifically, that the defendant knew a fire was present and that it endangered life or significant property. Undermining this point can be an effective defense.

• No Awareness of the Fire: The defense may present evidence that the defendant had no knowledge that a fire existed. Fires can begin in inaccessible areas, or while the defendant was asleep or distracted. Without proof of awareness, the first element of the charge collapses.
• No Awareness of the Danger: Even if the fire was seen, the defense can argue that it did not appear dangerous. A controlled flame, such as a neighbor’s fire pit or a small trash burn, may not seem threatening. If the defendant did not know it posed a danger, this element is not met.

Challenging Element 2 (Reasonable Action): “It Was Too Dangerous” or “I Acted Reasonably”

The second element concerns the reasonableness of the defendant’s actions or inaction in response to the fire. Here, the defense can shift the focus to the context of the situation.

• Substantial Risk Defense: The law explicitly states that no action is required if doing so would pose a substantial personal risk. A defense can highlight dangers like smoke inhalation, explosive materials, or collapsing structures. If intervention would have endangered the defendant, there was no duty to act.
• Reasonable Measures Were Taken: A defendant may argue that their response was, in fact, appropriate given the situation. For example, immediately evacuating others, moving a vehicle to allow emergency access, or using a fire extinguisher could qualify as reasonable. Additionally, whether a fire alarm was given “promptly” is a fact-specific question, what is prompt in one scenario may not be in another.

Challenging Element 3 (Duty): “I Had No Legal Duty” or “It Wasn’t My Responsibility”

The final element requires a specific legal duty, without it, there is no offense. This part of the statute is often the most critical to challenge.

• No Legal Obligation to Act: A bystander has no general legal duty to intervene or call for help. Unless the individual had an “official, contractual, or other legal duty,” the law may not apply. Someone walking past a fire on private property, for instance, likely has no such duty.
• Lack of Custody or Control: The defense may also show that the property where the fire occurred was not under the defendant’s control. In cases involving tenants, landlords, or shared spaces, legal responsibility can be unclear. A renter may argue that outdoor common areas were maintained by a property manager, not under their care.

In addition to these statutory defenses, a seasoned attorney will scrutinize the government’s entire case: from the legality of searches and seizures, to the accuracy of fire reports, to the reliability of witness accounts. Any flaws in the investigation or gaps in the evidence can contribute to reasonable doubt.

Defending Against Fire-Related Charges with Lustberg Law Offices, LLC

Being charged under N.J.S.A. 2C:17-1c for failing to control or report a fire is a serious legal matter with long-term consequences. Even though it’s classified as a fourth-degree crime, a conviction can lead to prison time, heavy fines, and a permanent felony record that cannot be expunged. This type of charge often involves complex questions about knowledge, risk, and legal responsibility, issues that require a detailed and strategic defense.

If you’ve been accused of failing to report or control a fire in New Jersey, don’t leave your future to chance. At Lustberg Law Offices, LLC, our team understands the nuances of criminal charges involving failure to report or control a fire. We may be able to assess the details of your case, identify weaknesses in the prosecution’s claims, and develop a tailored defense strategy aimed at protecting your rights and future. Call (201) 880-5311 today to speak with a New Jersey arson defense lawyer who can guide you through the legal process with clarity and determination.