State v. Zold
This text of 264 A.2d 257 (State v. Zold) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
DOUGLAS ZOLD, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.
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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
264 A.2d 257, 110 N.J. Super. 33, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-zold-njsuperctappdiv-1970.