State v. Clark

Supreme Court of New Jersey

State v. Clark

252 A.2d 720, 54 N.J. 25, 1969 N.J. LEXIS 166

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided May 5, 1969·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The judgment appealed from is affirmed for the reasons expressed in the opinion of the Appellate *26 Division. 105 N. J. Super. 381 (1968). In the event the defendant wishes to attack his administrative transfer to the State Prison Farm, Rahway, as an abuse of discretion, he may do so by an affirmative showing in an independent proceeding under B. B. 4:88-8. See State v. Miles, 87 N. J. Super. 571, 585-586 (Law Div. 1965), affirmed, 94 N. J. Super. 169 (App. Div. 1967).

For affirmance — Chief Justice Weintbaub and Justices Jacobs, Feancis, Peoctoe, Hall, Schettino and Hane-MAET - 7.

For reversal — None.

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

Per Curiam.

The judgment appealed from is affirmed for the reasons expressed in the opinion of the Appellate *26 Division. 105 N. J. Super. 381 (1968). In the event the defendant wishes to attack his administrative transfer to the State Prison Farm, Rahway, as an abuse of discretion, he may do so by an affirmative showing in an independent proceeding under B. B. 4:88-8. See State v. Miles, 87 N. J. Super. 571, 585-586 (Law Div. 1965), affirmed, 94 N. J. Super. 169 (App. Div. 1967).

For affirmance — Chief Justice Weintbaub and Justices Jacobs, Feancis, Peoctoe, Hall, Schettino and Hane-MAET - 7.

For reversal — None.

State v. Clark, 252 A.2d 720, 54 N.J. 25, 1969 N.J. LEXIS 166 (N.J. 1969).

Pincite

252 A.2d 720 (State v. Clark) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related