Jeffrey Skiendziul, Criminal Defense Lawyer in Hackensack, NJ

Jeffrey Skiendziul is a talented New Jersey gun lawyer with over fourteen (14) years of experience who appears on behalf of clients in courts across the state. He joined the Tormey Law Firm in 2021, where he represents clients on matters relating to the Second Amendment, including appealing Denial of Firearms Permits, Weapons Forfeiture Hearings on behalf of clients related to either Domestic Violence and Restraining Order matters, and Temporary Extreme Risk Protective Orders, as well as addressing questions related to the Second Amendment concerning transportation, storage, possession, purchase, and inheritance of firearms in New Jersey.

Apart from handling Second Amendment cases, Jeffrey routinely appears in Municipal Court representing clients charged with disorderly persons offenses and petty disorderly persons offenses, such as simple assault and harassment. Jeffrey also appears in Superior Courts in New Jersey representing clients charged with indictable offenses such as possession of a weapon for an unlawful purpose, individuals involved in Temporary Restraining Orders and Final Restraining Orders, Restraining Order Appeals, and individuals subject to Extreme Risk Protective Orders. Jeffrey also represents clients in New Jersey who wish to have an Estate Plan created, updated, or reviewed – including drafting and amending Last Will and Testaments, Living Will/Advance Health Care Directives, Power of Attorney, and Trusts.

Jeffrey Skiendziul attended Arcadia University, where he graduated with a bachelor’s degree in political science and a minor in Pre-Law. Upon graduating from Arcadia University, Jeffrey enrolled in and graduated from Thomas M. Cooley Law School with his Juris Doctorate with a concentration in Litigation. After graduating from law school, Jeffrey passed the New Jersey Bar Exam and became licensed to practice law in New Jersey. In addition, Jeffrey is admitted to practice before the United States Supreme Court.

Since becoming a licensed attorney, Jeffrey has been selected as a Rising Star on New Jersey Super Lawyers, a designation which only 2.5% of attorneys in New Jersey can claim. Apart from his selection to the Rising Stars list on Super Lawyers, Jeffrey has given speaking engagements concerning New Jersey Second Amendment law and the importance of having an Estate Plan in place for New Jersey residents.

Before joining the Tormey Law Firm, Jeffrey worked for one of the premier gun rights law firms in New Jersey, and he has personally handled hundreds of gun permit applications, gun permit denial appeals, and domestic violence restraining order matters in his distinguished career.

Personally, Jeffrey is a former NCAA Division III swimmer. He is a Master Mason – 3rd Degree at Durand Lodge #179. Jeffrey is involved in other organizations such as POAC, which aids people and their families who have relatives diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). Jeffrey is also bilingual and speaks Polish. Adwokat mówi po polsku.

Recent Firearm Case Results

In October 2026, Jeffrey represented clients in Superior Court in five (5) firearm permit denial appeals and one Temporary Extreme Risk Protective Order (TERPO) trial. He prevailed in all five permit appeals, and each of those clients can now lawfully exercise their Second Amendment rights. In the TERPO matter, he persuaded the judge at the conclusion of trial to dismiss the order and return the client’s firearms and property. The summaries below have been anonymized to protect client confidentiality.

TERPO Dismissed – Morris County (October 2026)

The client, a Morris County resident, was a long-time, lawful firearm owner with steady employment. He became subject to a TERPO after a website he had contacted, which allegedly reflected thoughts of self-harm, reached out to law enforcement without his knowledge. He had never been charged with a criminal offense, never been accused of domestic violence, never harmed or attempted to harm himself or anyone else, never mishandled or misused a firearm, and never openly expressed any desire to cause harm online. Apart from minor traffic tickets, he had no history of litigation at all.

After more than a year of litigation, including exchanging discovery with the Prosecutor and obtaining an expert report on the client’s behalf, Jeffrey showed the court that this was a middle-aged man who had one bad day in an otherwise law-abiding life. He also focused on the positive steps the client took after the TERPO was issued, such as developing better tools to manage stress and conflict, abstaining from excessive alcohol consumption, and beginning a new relationship. Jeffrey argued that the TERPO had served its initial purpose and that keeping it in place indefinitely would punish the client rather than promote public safety. The court agreed, finding that the client was no longer unfit to possess firearms, dismissed the TERPO, and ordered his firearms returned.

The takeaway: What you search for or view online can have real consequences, even if you never act on it. Constitutional rights are not absolute and are subject to “reasonable” limitations, and the line between a reasonable limitation and an unlawful infringement is often unclear. When you are facing a trained prosecutor arguing on behalf of the government, having an experienced advocate in court matters.

Firearm Permit Denial Overturned – Cape May County (October 2026)

The client, a lifelong Cape May County resident, was denied a firearms permit because of past contacts with law enforcement. Some of those contacts were traffic offenses, which cannot be expunged from a driving record; others involved no arrest at all; and still others had resulted in matters that were later expunged. Under New Jersey law, expunged matters are deemed not to have occurred, and the disclosure of an expunged record by a third party is a disorderly persons offense. Nevertheless, the police claimed the client lacked the “essential character of temperament” to be entrusted with a firearm.

After briefs were submitted and discovery was reviewed, Jeffrey cross-examined the State’s witness, the police investigator assigned to the permit application. The investigator admitted that he never spoke to the applicant or any of the third parties involved before recommending a denial, and never explained how these past interactions showed that the applicant was presently unfit to possess firearms. The client then testified about his employment, education, family life, and his contributions to the community as the owner of several local businesses. While the court acknowledged the client’s earlier adverse interactions with law enforcement, it found no connection between those past events and his present fitness to own firearms. The denial was overturned, and the client can now lawfully own firearms in New Jersey.

The takeaway: Any interaction with law enforcement, even one that never led to an arrest, can be used against you. Paying a traffic ticket online is an admission of guilt that stays on your record and can later be raised when you apply for a gun permit. Denials based on character of temperament are discretionary and fact-sensitive, so how your case is argued on appeal can make all the difference.

Four Firearm Permit Denials Overturned – Essex County (October 2026)

Client 1: Decades-Old, Out-of-State Conviction

This applicant was denied a firearm permit because of a criminal conviction from another state. The offense occurred decades earlier while he was a college student in his early twenties. It involved minor property damage and was non-violent, with no weapons, drugs, or domestic violence involved. By the time he applied, he was in his mid-forties, had relocated to New Jersey, completed his education, built a successful white-collar career, and was married with children. He had not re-offended, had no substance abuse or mental health concerns, answered his application truthfully, and his references spoke favorably on his behalf. The State nonetheless argued that the old conviction still showed he was unfit to possess firearms.

At trial, Jeffrey demonstrated that the passage of time and the significant changes in the client’s life, including his education, employment, marriage, and parenthood, meant the isolated incident no longer reflected his present fitness. The court agreed, and the client can now lawfully possess firearms in New Jersey.

The takeaway: A criminal conviction can follow you for decades, even if it happened outside New Jersey. This denial was a discretionary judgment call by the Chief of Police, so the outcome of the appeal depended heavily on the facts and how they were presented. Your advocate should know the statutes, the case law, and the court rules, and know how to argue them persuasively.

Client 2: Past Domestic Violence Allegations

This applicant, who was married with a child, was denied a gun permit based on domestic violence accusations from more than a decade earlier that never led to an arrest or a restraining order, along with a criminal allegation that had been dismissed. Since then, the applicant had married, become a parent, and maintained steady employment.

At trial, Jeffrey showed the judge that these old allegations, some of which cannot be removed from the applicant’s record, did not reflect the applicant’s present condition or their character of temperament to be entrusted with a firearm. The denial was overturned.

The takeaway: Even after you have changed your life for the better, brief past contact with law enforcement can still follow you. On appeal, it is up to you to show that those moments do not define who you are today. Knowing which questions the judge will ask, and how to answer them, can be the difference between keeping your Second Amendment rights intact and losing the ability to exercise them in New Jersey.

Client 3: Dispute With School Administrators

This applicant was a long-time gun owner who had previously been issued permits to purchase firearms. Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 Bruen decision, which eliminated the requirement to show a justifiable need, the applicant applied for a permit to carry a handgun. The applicant was married with children, gainfully employed, and trained in safe firearm handling. However, there had been a dispute with administrators at the children’s public school over school policy. Police were called, but no criminal charges followed. The applicant later moved the children to a private school and had no further issues. The carry permit was denied anyway because of the police contact connected to the school dispute.

At trial, Jeffrey showed the court that the applicant had taken the necessary steps to address the underlying cause of the conflict and that the issue had not resurfaced. There were no concerns involving drug use, mental health, physical disability, or domestic violence. The client prevailed and can now lawfully carry a handgun in New Jersey.

The takeaway: Even when you proactively resolve the problem that led to police contact, those steps may not be enough to overcome a denial by your local chief of police. How the story behind that contact is presented, and how clearly you show that the issue has been resolved, can determine whether you are able to carry a handgun legally.

Client 4: Past Traffic Violations, Including DWI

This applicant was denied a permit to purchase based solely on their driver’s abstract, which showed several traffic violations, including a Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) offense. There is no legal remedy to remove these violations from a driving record. However, almost all of them were more than ten years old, the applicant’s driver’s license was in good standing, and none of the offenses involved criminal charges or any unlawful transport or use of a weapon.

At trial, Jeffrey showed that the violations were remote in time and that the applicant had no new offenses. He also highlighted that, unlike other potential disqualifiers that can be resolved over time (such as expunging a criminal conviction, dismissal of a TRO, or reaching the age of 18 or 21), there is no remedy available for old traffic violations. The court found that while traffic violations can serve as an independent basis for disqualification, there must still be a connection between those violations and the applicant’s present fitness or character of temperament. Considering the applicant’s life today, including employment, education, family relationships, and ties to the community, the court granted the permit.

The takeaway: Old traffic tickets can be used to deny a gun permit, even if the application never asks about your driving history. The facts surrounding those tickets, along with how your life has changed since, can determine whether you are allowed to own firearms in New Jersey.

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Every case is different and depends on its own facts and circumstances.

Here is a review from one of Jeffrey’s many satisfied clients whose case was successfully handled:

Professional & knowledgeable representation

5.0 stars – Posted by Victor

Very knowledgeable and punctual, Jeffrey was pleasant to work with. He represented my son and I in separate traffic violation cases. I was extremely satisfied with the outcome and minimum fine he fought for me. I would recommend him to anyone looking for professional representation

Bar Admissions

• New Jersey
• United States Supreme Court

Education

• Thomas M. Cooley Law School, Lansing, Michigan
  • J.D.
  • Dean’s List
• Arcadia University, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania
  • B.A.

Awards and Recognitions

• Rising Stars, New Jersey Super Lawyers