From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Hammond

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division
Dec 18, 1969
107 N.J. Super. 588 (App. Div. 1969)

Opinion

Submitted December 8, 1969 —

Decided December 18, 1969.

Appeal from Hudson County Court, Law Division.

Before Judges CONFORD, COLLESTER and KOLOVSKY.

Mr. Samuel R. De Luca for defendant ( Messrs. Krivit Krivit, attorneys).

Mr. Edward C. Megill, Assistant Prosecutor, for plaintiff ( Mr. James A. Tumulty, Jr., Hudson County Prosecutor, attorney).


The trial court erred in limiting the six defendants, including appellant, to ten peremptory challenges collectively, rather than allowing them ten each. N.J.S. 2A:78-7; R.R. 3:7-2(c) (now R. 1:8-3(d)). See State v. Rogers, 19 N.J. 218 , 227 (1955). Common legal representation at trial does not affect the right.

Defendants exhausted the ten peremptory challenges allowed by the court. Denial of the right to the specified number of peremptory challenges is prejudicial per se. See Wright v. Bernstein, 23 N.J. 284 , 295 (1957).

There was no error in the other grounds of appeal argued, but for the reason stated the conviction must be and is

Reversed.


Summaries of

State v. Hammond

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division
Dec 18, 1969
107 N.J. Super. 588 (App. Div. 1969)
Case details for

State v. Hammond

Case Details

Full title:THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. CLAUDE HAMMOND…

Court:Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division

Date published: Dec 18, 1969

Citations

107 N.J. Super. 588 (App. Div. 1969)
259 A.2d 718

Citing Cases

State v. Williams

Nevertheless, we have not adopted a jury-bias standard. See, e.g., State v. Pereira, 202 N.J. Super. 434, 438…

State v. Wilson

See 82 N.J. at 185-187, 412 A.2d 120. See also State v. Reynolds, 124 N.J. 559, 568, 592 A.2d 194 (1991);…