State v. Jenkins

Supreme Court of New Jersey

State v. Jenkins

59 A.2d 372, 137 N.J.L. 209, 1948 N.J. LEXIS 309

CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey

DecidedMay 13, 1948

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 59 A.2d 372 (State v. Jenkins) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Jenkins, 59 A.2d 372, 137 N.J.L. 209, 1948 N.J. LEXIS 309 (N.J. 1948).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Defendants in error were indicted by the Hudson County grand jury for non-feasance and misconduct in public office. They, haring pleaded not guilty to the indictment, were permitted to withdraw that plea for the purpose of making application to the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari. The application was made and the writ allowed. That court, in an opinion by Chief Justice Case, held the indictment defective for uncertainty and an order quashing the indictment was filed. Prom that order this writ of error was sued out by the State. A motion was subsequently made by defendants in error to dismiss the writ of error. A determination of this motion was held by the court pending argument on the merits.

It is settled law that a writ of error is not available to review the exercise by the Supreme Court of its discretionary power to quash an indictment. State v. Riggs, 92 N. J. L. 575. Particularly is that rule applicable in the instant case where the judicial discretion exercised by that court was not used capriciously in violation of settled legal principles. State v. Potter, 83 Id. 428; affirmed, 85 Id. 388.

The writ of error will be dismissed.

For affirmance — Wacheneeld, Schettino, JJ. 2.

For reversal — The Chancellor, Bodine, Donees, Hewer. Eastwood, Wells, Dill, Freund, McLean, JJ. 9.

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

Per Curiam.

Defendants in error were indicted by the Hudson County grand jury for non-feasance and misconduct in public office. They, haring pleaded not guilty to the indictment, were permitted to withdraw that plea for the purpose of making application to the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari. The application was made and the writ allowed. That court, in an opinion by Chief Justice Case, held the indictment defective for uncertainty and an order quashing the indictment was filed. Prom that order this writ of error was sued out by the State. A motion was subsequently made by defendants in error to dismiss the writ of error. A determination of this motion was held by the court pending argument on the merits.

It is settled law that a writ of error is not available to review the exercise by the Supreme Court of its discretionary power to quash an indictment. State v. Riggs, 92 N. J. L. 575. Particularly is that rule applicable in the instant case where the judicial discretion exercised by that court was not used capriciously in violation of settled legal principles. State v. Potter, 83 Id. 428; affirmed, 85 Id. 388.

The writ of error will be dismissed.

For affirmance — Wacheneeld, Schettino, JJ. 2.

For reversal — The Chancellor, Bodine, Donees, Hewer. Eastwood, Wells, Dill, Freund, McLean, JJ. 9.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 A.2d 372, 137 N.J.L. 209, 1948 N.J. LEXIS 309, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-jenkins-nj-1948.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack