1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.J.
  4. 237 N.J.
  5. 237 N.J. Super. 63 (1989)
 

STATE v. ROSARIO

237 N.J. Super. 63 (1989)

566 A.2d 1173

STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. ARMANDO ROSARIO, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Decided December 8, 1989.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Jane E. Haburay, Assistant Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for appellant (Alfred A. Slocum, Public Defender, attorney; Jane E. Haburay, of counsel and on the brief).

Jack L. Weinberg, Assistant Prosecutor, argued the cause for respondent (Samuel Asbell, Camden County Prosecutor, attorney; Jack L. Weinberg, of counsel and on the letter brief).

Before Judges J.H. COLEMAN, BRODY and MUIR, Jr.

The opinion of the Court was delivered by MUIR, Jr., J.A.D.

After the Camden County Prosecutor refused to consent to defendant's diversion into the Camden Pretrial Intervention Program (PTI), and the trial judge found no patent and gross abuse of discretion in that refusal, defendant pled guilty to possession of cocaine, a violation of N.J.S.A. 24:21.20(a)(1). Another trial judge sentenced defendant to three...

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