State v. Gonzalez-Monasterio

Supreme Court of New Jersey

State v. Gonzalez-Monasterio

157 A.3d 414, 228 N.J. 335

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided March 27, 2017·Published

Opinion

ORDER

This matter having been duly considered by the Court;

It is ORDERED that to provide guidance to the trial court on remand, the Appellate Division’s decision is summarily modified as follows. The trial court did not err — as the Appellate Division concluded — in instructing the jury on principles of accomplice liability concerning the charge of hindering apprehension, N.J.S.A. 2C:29-3.

The Court having determined that certification was improvidently granted as to all other issues presented in this appeal;

It is ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed.

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

ORDER

This matter having been duly considered by the Court;

It is ORDERED that to provide guidance to the trial court on remand, the Appellate Division’s decision is summarily modified as follows. The trial court did not err — as the Appellate Division concluded — in instructing the jury on principles of accomplice liability concerning the charge of hindering apprehension, N.J.S.A. 2C:29-3.

The Court having determined that certification was improvidently granted as to all other issues presented in this appeal;

It is ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed.

State v. Gonzalez-Monasterio, 157 A.3d 414, 228 N.J. 335 (N.J. 2017).

Pincite

157 A.3d 414 (State v. Gonzalez-Monasterio) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.