From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Hurtado

Supreme Court of New Jersey
Nov 7, 1988
113 N.J. 1 (N.J. 1988)

Summary

reversing on Judge Skillman's dissenting opinion, 219 N.J. Super. 12, 23-28 (App. Div. 1987)

Summary of this case from State v. Ciely

Opinion

Argued October 24, 1988 —

Decided November 7, 1988.

Appeal from Superior Court, Appellate Division.

Peter M. Jacques, Assistant Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for appellant ( Alfred A. Slocum, Public Defender, attorney).

Mildred Vallerini Spiller, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent ( Cary Edwards, Attorney General of New Jersey, attorney).


The judgment of the Appellate Division is reversed, the matter is remanded to the trial court to permit defendant to retract his guilty plea, substantially for the reasons expressed in the dissenting opinion of Judge Skillman, reported at 219 N.J. Super. 12, 23 (1987).

For reversal and remandment — Chief Justice WILENTZ, and Justices CLIFFORD, HANDLER, POLLOCK, O'HERN, GARIBALDI and STEIN — 7.

Opposed — None.


Summaries of

State v. Hurtado

Supreme Court of New Jersey
Nov 7, 1988
113 N.J. 1 (N.J. 1988)

reversing on Judge Skillman's dissenting opinion, 219 N.J. Super. 12, 23-28 (App. Div. 1987)

Summary of this case from State v. Ciely

discussing authority of police to arrest for municipal ordinance violation

Summary of this case from State v. Daniels
Case details for

State v. Hurtado

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. JORGE HURTADO…

Court:Supreme Court of New Jersey

Date published: Nov 7, 1988

Citations

113 N.J. 1 (N.J. 1988)
549 A.2d 428

Citing Cases

State v. Doss

A police officer may also make a warrantless arrest of someone who, in his presence, has committed a…

State in re R.M

52(b)(1) specifically authorizes municipalities to adopt curfew ordinances. R.M. argues, relying upon State…