State v. Krempecki

231 A.2d 811, 50 N.J. 50, 1967 N.J. LEXIS 156
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedJuly 20, 1967
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 231 A.2d 811 (State v. Krempecki) 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. Krempecki, 231 A.2d 811, 50 N.J. 50, 1967 N.J. LEXIS 156 (N.J. 1967).

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered

Pee Curiam.

Defendant was convicted of bookmaking in violation of N. J. 8. BA :112-3. He appealed to the Appellate Division. The sole issue involved is the refusal of the trial court to order the disclosure of the identity of an informer-witness. We certified the appeal before argument in the Appellate Division because two parts of the Appellate Division had reached contrary results upon the same issue in eases decided by us today. State v. Oliver, 50 N. J. 39 (1967), and State v. Bacsko, 50 N. J. 49 (1967).

The judgment of conviction is affirmed for the reasons given in Oliver.

For affirmance — Chief Justice Weintbaub and Justices Jacobs, Francis, Proctor and Hall — 5.

For reversal — None.

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

Related

Henry v. New Jersey Department of Human Services
9 A.3d 882 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
231 A.2d 811, 50 N.J. 50, 1967 N.J. LEXIS 156, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-krempecki-nj-1967.