State v. Garrigan

315 A.2d 385, 64 N.J. 287

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Garrigan. Read the opinion of the Court — 64 N.J. 287 →

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided February 20, 1974·Published

Opinion

64 N.J. 287 (1974) 315 A.2d 385

The Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Argued January 21, 1974. Decided February 5, 1974. Amended February 20, 1974.

Mr. John J. Connell argued the cause for appellant (Mr. Henry F. Gill, attorney).

Mr. John De Cicco, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent (Mr. William F. Hyland, Attorney General, attorney).

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the Appellate Division is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed in the majority's per curiam opinion.

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

64 N.J. 287 (1974) 315 A.2d 385

The Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Argued January 21, 1974. Decided February 5, 1974. Amended February 20, 1974.

Mr. John J. Connell argued the cause for appellant (Mr. Henry F. Gill, attorney).

Mr. John De Cicco, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent (Mr. William F. Hyland, Attorney General, attorney).

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the Appellate Division is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed in the majority's per curiam opinion.

State v. Garrigan, 315 A.2d 385, 64 N.J. 287 (N.J. 1974).

Pincite

315 A.2d 385 (State v. Garrigan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

315 A.2d 385 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1974)