STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. KESON JENKINS (15-12-2817, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

• Court: New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
• Decided: October 31, 2017
• Docket: A-4814-15T1
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court." Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R. 1:36-3.

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-4814-15T1

STATE OF NEW JERSEY,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

KESON JENKINS,

Defendant-Respondent,

and

IMAN PARKER and FIRST INDEMNITY OF AMERICA INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendants,

ALL USA BAIL BONDS,

Defendant-Appellant. ____________________________________

Argued October 16, 2017 – Decided October 31, 2017

Before Judges Messano and Vernoia.

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Essex County, Indictment No. 15-12-2817.

Samuel M. Silver argued the cause for appellant. Eric B. Kaviar argued the cause for respondent Keson Jenkins.

PER CURIAM

Appellant All USA Bail Bonds appeals from a June 1, 2016

order denying its motion for exoneration as surety and discharge

of a $50,000 bond it posted for defendant Keson Jenkins's release

on bail on three drug offenses. We are advised the charges against

Jenkins have been resolved and that, as a result, the bond has

been discharged or will be discharged upon appellant's request.

We dismiss the appeal as moot. See Finkel v. Twp. Comm., 434

N.J. Super. 303, 315 (App. Div. 2013) ("[O]ur courts often decline

to review legal questions that have become academic prior to

judicial scrutiny, out of reluctance to render a decision in the

abstract on such moot issues and a related desire to conserve

judicial resources."). We are also satisfied the issues presented

are not "of significant public importance," ibid., and are

otherwise fact-sensitive and therefore not "'capable of

repetition, yet evading review' because of the short duration of

any single plaintiff's interest," ibid. (quoting In re Conroy, 190

N.J. Super. 453, 459 (App. Div. 1983), rev'd on other grounds, 98

N.J. 321 (1985)).

Dismissed as moot.

2 A-4814-15T1