State v. Scharfstein

200 A.2d 777, 42 N.J. 354, 1964 N.J. LEXIS 215
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided June 1, 1964·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered

Per Curiam.

We affirm the judgment of the Appellate Division for the reasons given by it. State v. Scharfstein, 79 N. J. Super. 236 (App. Div. 1963). We emphasize that here, upon an anonymous tip and nothing more, there was a search of the person. We intimate no view upon whether such infor *355 mation would justify a search of a vehicle if surveillance is not feasible or whether upon such information the person too may be searched if the alleged offense is grievous and such immediate measures appear to be urgently needed.

For affirmance — Chief Justice Weinteaub, and Justices Jacobs, Peoctoe, Hall, Schettino and Haneman — 6.

For reversal — None.

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

State v. Scharfstein, 200 A.2d 777, 42 N.J. 354, 1964 N.J. LEXIS 215 (N.J. 1964).

200 A.2d 777 (State v. Scharfstein) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Henry v. New Jersey Department of Human Services
9 A.3d 882 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2010)
State v. Hurtado
529 A.2d 1000 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1987)
Ciminski v. Finn Corp.
537 P.2d 850 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 1975)
State v. Smith
324 A.2d 62 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1974)
State v. Hannah
310 A.2d 512 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1973)