State v. Cox
This text of 388 A.2d 1272 (State v. Cox) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
JOHN M. COX, PENDELEN CANDITO, ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.
Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.
*29 Before Judges LYNCH, BISCHOFF and KOLE.
Mr. Harold J. Ruvoldt argued the cause for appellant John M. Cox (Messrs. Ruvoldt & Ruvoldt, attorneys).
Mr. James A. Mella argued the cause for appellant Pendelen Candito (Messrs. J.J. & J.C. Messina, attorneys).
Mr. Blair R. Zwillman, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent (Mr. John J. Degnan, Attorney General, attorney for respondent; Mr. William F. Hyland, former Attorney General and Mr. Zwillman, of counsel and on the brief).
PER CURIAM.
The trial court, by orders of June 21, 1977 and August 7, 1977, denied defendants' motions to dismiss the counts of the indictment relating to the crimes of cheating or defrauding by false pretenses and conspiracy with respect thereto, as well as aiding and abetting in the commission of the false pretenses crimes. N.J.S.A. 2A:111-1, *30 2A:98-1, 2A:98-2 and 2A:85-14.[1] These consolidated appeals followed.
The orders are affirmed substantially for the reasons set forth by Judge Bachman in his opinion reported at 150 N.J. Super. 599 (Law Div. 1977).
Affirmed.
NOTES
[1] We note that the charges in the indictment involving defendant Candito do not specifically charge the aiding and abetting statute, N.J.S.A. 2A:85-14. Such omission is of no legal significance. State v. Cooper, 10 N.J. 532, 568 (1952).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
388 A.2d 1272, 160 N.J. Super. 28, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-cox-njsuperctappdiv-1978.