The Appellate Division continued in relevant part: Based on the opinion's clear directive, we are reticent to conclude that the Erlinger majority meant for the constitutional rights recognized in Apprendi and its progeny to be treated essentially as a second-class...
On November 27, 2024, a three-judge appellate panel decided the Atlantic County case of State v. Jamel Carlton. The principal issue under N.J.S.A. 2C:44-3 concerned to application of New Jersey’s persistent offender sentencing statue in light of the U.S. Supreme...
On December 20, 2024, a three-judge appellate panel decided the Essex County case of State v. Jeremy Arrington. The principal issue under N.J.S.A. 2C:4-1 concerned whether a defendant could testify to their alleged insanity without accompanying expert testimony....
The Appellate Division continued in relevant part: Defendant attempts to distinguish Cuccurullo because it was "in the context of applying motor vehicle penalties" rather than criminal penalties under N.J.S.A. 2C:40-26. This distinction is immaterial in the present...
The Appellate Division continued in relevant part: In the context of applying the enhanced penalties under N.J.S.A. 39:3-40 for driving while suspended for DWI, we previously determined in Cuccurullo that a defendant is "'under suspension' from the time that the...
On November 1, 2024, a three-judge appellate panel decided the Cape May County case of State v. Steven Italiano. The principal issue under N.J.S.A. 2C:40-26 concerned the appropriate charge for driving while suspended for a non-DWI, but subject to a court-ordered...
Judge Sabatino concluded in relevant part: The Court is cognizant that it can be impractical or hazardous for an officer to determine whether a driver clearly does not resemble the photo or description of the vehicle owner. The stop may occur at night in a poorly lit...
The unanimous New Jersey Supreme Court continued in relevant part: Data supplied by the Attorney General corroborates to some extent what the Supreme Court majority in Glover described as the “commonsense” nature of an inference that the vehicle owner, despite having...
Judge Sabatino continued in relevant part: Here, the Court considers for the first time whether the analysis in Glover -- specifically involving driver’s license revocation laws in Kansas -- supports a comparable approach in New Jersey in a setting involving a car...
The Court continued in relevant part: In Delaware v. Prouse, the United States Supreme Court held that a detention of a motorist to check credentials is unreasonable, except in situations in which there is at least reasonable and articulable suspicion that a motorist...