State v. Finkle
329 A.2d 65, 66 N.J. 139, 1974 N.J. LEXIS 146
Opinion
The judgment is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed by the Appellate Division. 128 N. J. Super. 199.
Clieeobd, J., concurs in the result.
For affirmance — Chief Justice Hughes, Justices Jacobs, Mountain, Sullivan, Pashman, Clieeobd and Judge Col-lestee — 7.
For reversal — None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
State v. Finkle, 329 A.2d 65, 66 N.J. 139, 1974 N.J. LEXIS 146 (N.J. 1974).
329 A.2d 65 (State v. Finkle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Henry v. New Jersey Department of Human Services
9 A.3d 882 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2010)
State v. Abeskaron
740 A.2d 690 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1999)
State v. Gunter
554 A.2d 1356 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1989)
State v. Snyder
464 A.2d 1209 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1983)
Commonwealth v. Whynaught
384 N.E.2d 1212 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1979)
State v. Readding
389 A.2d 512 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1978)
State v. Boyington
379 A.2d 486 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1977)
State v. Cardone
368 A.2d 952 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1976)
State v. Smithson
375 A.2d 268 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1976)
State v. Overton
343 A.2d 516 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1975)
Stamato & Co., Inc. v. TP. OF VERNON
329 A.2d 65 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1974)