The Supreme Court majority continued: And cases Mr. Currier cites for support, e.g., Harris v. Washington, 404 U. S. 55, merely applied Ashe’s test and concluded that a second trial was impermissible. They do not address the question whether the Double Jeopardy Clause prevents a second trial when the defendant consents to it. Mr. Currier […]

Justice Gorsuch continued: Ashe’s suggestion that the relitigating of an issue may amount to the impermissible relitigating of an offense represented a significant innovation in this Court’s jurisprudence. But whatever else may be said about Ashe, the Court has emphasized that its test is a demanding one. Ashe forbids a second trial only if to […]

On June 22, 2018, the United States Supreme Court decided the case of State of Virginia v. Michael Currier. The principal issue was whether double jeopardy and/or collateral estoppel precluded the trial of a set of charges that were severed from the first case after the defendant was acquitted of all charges in the first […]

Although a buccal swab at the time of arrest or booking “does not increase the indignity already attendant to normal incidents of arrest,” King, 569 U.S. at 464, the same cannot be presumed nearly eight months after arrest, and five months after indictment. As a matter of legal principle, the hearsay nature of the assistant […]

The Court continued in relevant part: Defendant moved to dismiss the appeal as moot because it came to light that the gun was tested for DNA in 2016 and no DNA was found.  The Court now denies the motion, choosing to resolve this important constitutional question. Although an affidavit of a police officer familiar with […]

On July 24, 2018, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided the Hudson County case of State v. Tariq S. Gathers. The principal issue was whether a hearsay certification from an assistant prosecutor can support probable cause to compel a defendant to submit to a buccal swab. Writing for a unanimous Court, Justice Solomon held in […]

Judge Vernoia concluded with the following: We are therefore convinced the court erred by dismissing count two. The evidence showed defendants obtained the NJDEP’s property by deception in violation of N.J.S.A. 2C:20-4(a) because it transferred something of value, contract rights over which the NJDEP had an interest, in response to defendants’ false statements about their […]

The Court continued: Applying these definitions, to establish a violation of N.J.S.A. 2C:20-4(a) based on the theft of the ACO alleged in count one, the State was required to show that the NJDEP had a “legal interest” in contract rights that it transferred to defendants in the ACO, and that the contract rights had value. […]

The second principal issue presented in the case was whether false representations made during contract negotiations or in furtherance of obtaining a mortgage constitute a theft by deception under New Jersey’s criminal code. The court held in relevant part as follows: We next consider the State’s challenge to the court’s dismissal of count two, which […]

Judge Vernoia continued: The Legislature, however, did not similarly adopt a definition of the term “contract” for application to the other governmental entities that were the subject of the legislation. Thus, the Legislature demonstrated it would expressly provide a definition of the term where it intended for it to apply, and otherwise relied upon the […]