On August 7, 2023, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided the Hudson County case of State v. Jason O’Donnell. The principal issue under N.J.S.A. 2C:27-2 concerned whether unsuccessful candidates for public office could be convicted for accepting a bribe. Chief Justice...
The Court concluded with the following in relevant part: With regard to the best interests of the victim and any child, the court notes that that minor child herein is not W.M-H.'s child. The court also highlights the short nature of the parties' relationship. The...
The Court continued in relevant part: As for any previous history of domestic violence between E.W. and defendant, including threats, harassment and physical abuse, there is no evidence of such in this record. The parties dated for a brief period of time,...
Judge Sanders continued in relevant part: Considering these express statements by the Legislature and finding them to be essentially synergistic and complimentary in purpose, the court concludes that the application of immunity to purported harassing conduct by way of...
On January 5, 2023, the Essex County Superior Court decided the case of E.W. v. W.M-H. The principal issue under N.J.S.A. 2C:25-29 concerned whether the domestic violence defendant could invoke statutory immunity to exclude his reports to DCPP regarding the...
The Court concluded with the following in relevant part: Defendant contends that the "core purpose" of the Double Jeopardy Clause is to protect "defendants against the harassment of unfair, repeated prosecutions." But the trial court explicitly found that defendant...
Justice Wainer Apter continued in relevant part: We disagree that allowing a retrial here would confer any unfair advantage on the State. Trial ended before defendant called a single witness or introduced a single piece of evidence. Defendant conceded at oral argument...
The New Jersey Supreme Court continued in relevant part: Second, defendant frames the question presented as whether "prejudice to the State" can "constitute a 'manifest necessity' to declare a mistrial without triggering the double jeopardy bar to a re-trial."...
On August 9, 2023, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided the Hudson County case of State v. Stephen Zadroga. The principal issue under N.J.S.A. 2C:1-9 concerned whether double jeopardy barred a retrial of the charges unrelated to intoxication after a mistrial was...
The United States Supreme Court concluded with the following in relevant part: A speaker’s fear of mistaking whether a statement is a threat, fear of the legal system getting that judgment wrong, and fear of incurring legal costs all may lead a speaker to swallow...