State v. Urban

Supreme Court of New Jersey

State v. Urban

128 A. 785, 3 N.J. Misc. 477, 1925 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 193

CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey

DecidedMay 6, 1925

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 128 A. 785 (State v. Urban) 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. Urban, 128 A. 785, 3 N.J. Misc. 477, 1925 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 193 (N.J. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The action of the trial judge, at the close of the testimony, in taking upon himself the determination of the question whether the defendant was guilty or innocent of the charge laid against him in the indictment, was an usurpation of the function of the jury, and deprived the defendant of his constitutional right to have the question determined by the latter body. Eor this reason the conviction under review will he reversed, and the record remitted to the Hudson Quarter Sessions in order that the case may there he retried.

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

Per Curiam.

The action of the trial judge, at the close of the testimony, in taking upon himself the determination of the question whether the defendant was guilty or innocent of the charge laid against him in the indictment, was an usurpation of the function of the jury, and deprived the defendant of his constitutional right to have the question determined by the latter body. Eor this reason the conviction under review will he reversed, and the record remitted to the Hudson Quarter Sessions in order that the case may there he retried.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

128 A. 785, 3 N.J. Misc. 477, 1925 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 193, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-urban-nj-1925.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack