1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.J.
  4. 66 N.J.
  5. 66 N.J. 339 (1975)
 

STATE v. CLARK

66 N.J. 339 (1975)

331 A.2d 257

STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. SAMUEL LEE CLARK, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Decided January 21, 1975.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Mr. Howard Allen Cohen argued the cause for appellant (Mr. William F. Hyland, Attorney General of New Jersey, attorney; Mr. Cohen, of counsel and on the brief).

Mr. E. Carl Broege argued the cause for respondent (Mr. Stanley Van Ness, Public Defender, attorney; Mr. Broege, of counsel).

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed by the Appellate Division, 128 N.J.Super. 120.

HUGHES, C.J. (dissenting).

I respectfully dissent from the majority view and would reverse the Appellate Division and reinstate the judgment of conviction below.

The reference to the polygraph test by the State witness was inadvertent and unintended, and no question of prosecutorial...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases