State v. Bacsko
This text of 231 A.2d 811 (State v. Bacsko) 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.
Opinion
The opinion of the court was delivered
Defendant was convicted of bookmaldng in violation of N. J. S. 2A :112-3. The conviction was affirmed by the Appellate Division in an unreported opinion. We granted certification. 48 N. J. 139 (1966). The principal issue is whether the trial court erred in refusing to require the disclosure of the identity of an informer. The issue is the same one involved in State v. Oliver, 50 N. J. 39 (1967), decided this day. Por the reasons stated in Oliver, we agree with the judgment of the Appellate Division. No other question in the case requires discussion.
The judgment of the Appellate Division is affirmed.
For affirmance — Chief Justice Weintraur and Justices Jacobs, Francis, Proctor and Hall — 5.
For reversal — None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
231 A.2d 811, 50 N.J. 49, 1967 N.J. LEXIS 155, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-bacsko-nj-1967.