State v. Black
This text of 99 A. 1071 (State v. Black) 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 Supreme Court in dealing with this case (86 N. J. L. 520) correctly pointed out that the defendant's motion to [724]*724direct an acquittal, made at the close of the stated case, was not renewed at the end of the case. Mr. Justice Kalisch, speaking for the Supreme Court, then proceeded to declare that “even if the motion had been renewed at the end of the case, it would not have availed Curts.”
"We have not considered the propriety of that declaration because the question is not involved in the decision, and respecting it we express no opinion.
In all other respects we approve of the opinion.
The judgment of the Supreme Court, affirming that of the Sussex Quarter Sessions, will be affirmed.
For affirmance—The Chancellor, Garrison, Swayze, Trenchard, Bergen, Minturn, Black, White, Heppenheimer, Williams, Taylor, Gardner, JJ. 12.
For reversal—None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
99 A. 1071, 89 N.J.L. 723, 4 Gummere 723, 1916 N.J. LEXIS 388, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-black-nj-1916.