State v. Zold

264 A.2d 257, 110 N.J. Super. 33
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division·Decided April 24, 1970·Published·Cited by 10 cases

Opinion

110 N.J. Super. 33 (1970)
264 A.2d 257

STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
DOUGLAS ZOLD, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Argued April 13, 1970.
Decided April 24, 1970.

Before Judges CONFORD, COLLESTER and KOLOVSKY.

Mr. Daniel R. Coburn, Assistant Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for appellant (Mr. Stanley C. Van Ness, Public Defender, attorney).

Mr. Robert L. Messick, Assistant Prosecutor, argued the cause for respondent (Mr. A. Donald Bigley, Camden County Prosecutor, attorney).

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed for the reasons given by Judge Peel in his opinion denying post-conviction relief. 105 N.J. Super. 194 (Law Div. 1969).

All other questions raised are concluded against defendant by the opinion (unreported) of this court affirming the conviction on the direct appeal.

Judgment affirmed.

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

State v. Zold, 264 A.2d 257, 110 N.J. Super. 33 (N.J. Ct. App. 1970).

264 A.2d 257 (State v. Zold) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Clark
744 A.2d 109 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2000)
State v. Clark
735 A.2d 1 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1999)
State v. Williams
663 A.2d 1378 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1995)
State v. Preciose
609 A.2d 1280 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1992)
State v. Laurick
575 A.2d 1340 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1990)
In Re Opinion 452 of the Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics
432 A.2d 829 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1981)
Tully v. Scheu
487 F. Supp. 404 (D. New Jersey, 1980)
State v. Zold
270 A.2d 34 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1970)
SYRIAN ARCHDIOCESE OF NY v. Palisades Assoc.
264 A.2d 257 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1970)