McCarthy v. State

Supreme Court of New Jersey

McCarthy v. State

139 A. 52, 5 N.J. Misc. 960, 1927 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 70

DecidedOctober 27, 1927

StatusPublished

This text of 139 A. 52 (McCarthy v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

McCarthy v. State, 139 A. 52, 5 N.J. Misc. 960, 1927 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 70 (N.J. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

Pee Curiam.

The defendants in this case were convicted under the first and third counts in the indictment, which alleged that the defendants had obtained $1,500 by means of false pretenses. The court directed a verdict for the defendants on the second count — receiving stolen goods. It is now urged for a reversal that the trial court erred in refusing to grant the motion to direct a verdict on the third count — for false pretenses. Let this be as it may, it will not cause a reversal for the conviction on the first count of grand larcény, as that count is not attacked. That count is sufficient to support the judgment. State v. Huggins, 84 N. J. L. 254; State v. Rommel, 3 N. J. Mis. R. 204; affirmed, 3 N. J. Adv. R. 1401.

The judgment of the Essex Court of Quarter Sessions is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Pee Curiam.

The defendants in this case were convicted under the first and third counts in the indictment, which alleged that the defendants had obtained $1,500 by means of false pretenses. The court directed a verdict for the defendants on the second count — receiving stolen goods. It is now urged for a reversal that the trial court erred in refusing to grant the motion to direct a verdict on the third count — for false pretenses. Let this be as it may, it will not cause a reversal for the conviction on the first count of grand larcény, as that count is not attacked. That count is sufficient to support the judgment. State v. Huggins, 84 N. J. L. 254; State v. Rommel, 3 N. J. Mis. R. 204; affirmed, 3 N. J. Adv. R. 1401.

The judgment of the Essex Court of Quarter Sessions is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

139 A. 52, 5 N.J. Misc. 960, 1927 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 70, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccarthy-v-state-nj-1927.