State v. Foy

New Jersey Superior Court App Division

State v. Foy

380 A.2d 301, 153 N.J. Super. 503, 1977 N.J. Super. LEXIS 1142

CourtNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division

DecidedNovember 10, 1977

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 380 A.2d 301 (State v. Foy) 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.

Bluebook

State v. Foy, 380 A.2d 301, 153 N.J. Super. 503, 1977 N.J. Super. LEXIS 1142 (N.J. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Pursuant to leave granted, the State appealed from an order of the Law Division denying its motion to compel defendant, who was lawfully in custody for one crime, to appear in an other-crime lineup. Judge Meredith’s opinion denying the motion is reported at 146 N. J. Super. 378 (Law Div. 1976).

By letter of the Office of the Public Defender dated September 27, 1977 and at oral argument we were advised that defendant was no longer incarcerated; that he had pleaded guilty on May 5, 1977 to the charges on which he was being held at the time of the State’s attempt to place him in an other-crime lineup and that on June 10, 1977 he was sentenced to an indeterminate term at Yardville on the robbery count of that indictment and a concurrent indeterminate term for the armed feature thereof, both sentences suspended with concurrent three year terms of probation.

In view of the fact that defendant is no longer in custody, the matters in issue have been mooted. The appeal in its present posture is not the proper vehicle for a determination by us of the constitutional issues involved. Absent a justiciable controversy, we deem it inadvisable to render an opinion which would be necessarily merely advisory in nature. Rybeck v. Rybeck, 150 N. J. Super. 151, 155 — 156 (App. Div. 1977).

The matter having become moot, the appeal is dismissed without prejudice.

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

Per Curiam.

Pursuant to leave granted, the State appealed from an order of the Law Division denying its motion to compel defendant, who was lawfully in custody for one crime, to appear in an other-crime lineup. Judge Meredith’s opinion denying the motion is reported at 146 N. J. Super. 378 (Law Div. 1976).

By letter of the Office of the Public Defender dated September 27, 1977 and at oral argument we were advised that defendant was no longer incarcerated; that he had pleaded guilty on May 5, 1977 to the charges on which he was being held at the time of the State’s attempt to place him in an other-crime lineup and that on June 10, 1977 he was sentenced to an indeterminate term at Yardville on the robbery count of that indictment and a concurrent indeterminate term for the armed feature thereof, both sentences suspended with concurrent three year terms of probation.

In view of the fact that defendant is no longer in custody, the matters in issue have been mooted. The appeal in its present posture is not the proper vehicle for a determination by us of the constitutional issues involved. Absent a justiciable controversy, we deem it inadvisable to render an opinion which would be necessarily merely advisory in nature. Rybeck v. Rybeck, 150 N. J. Super. 151, 155 — 156 (App. Div. 1977).

The matter having become moot, the appeal is dismissed without prejudice.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

380 A.2d 301, 153 N.J. Super. 503, 1977 N.J. Super. LEXIS 1142, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-foy-njsuperctappdiv-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack