Summary
directing reviewing courts to "focus on the objective exigency of the circumstances faced by the officers"
Summary of this case from State v. VerpentOpinion
05-12-2015
STATE of New Jersey, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. Kenneth W. VERPENT, Defendant–Appellant.
Opinion The Court having granted defendant's petition for certification in this matter on a suppression issue and two trial issues; and
The Court having heard argument on the merits on November 7, 2013, and the Court having been asked to consider the application of Missouri v. McNeely, ––– U.S. ––––, 133 S.Ct. 1552, 185 L.Ed. 2d 696 (2013) to the suppression issue raised herein; and
Following the oral argument conducted in this matter, a question about the retroactive effect to be given to McNeely having been raised; and
The Court having heard argument on that retroactivity question on December 3, 2014, in State v. Adkins, (A–91–13), and, on that same day, having heard reargument in this matter limited to the question of McNeely 's retroactive application; and
The Court having issued its decision in State v. Adkins, 221 N.J. 300, 113 A. 3d 734 (2015), on May 4, 2015, holding that McNeely shall receive retroactive application;
It is hereby ORDERED as follows:
(1) A new suppression hearing must be conducted in this matter in order that exigency may be assessed on a newly developed and fuller record in light of this Court's holding in Adkins ;(2) The judgment on the suppression issue is reversed and the matter is remanded for the new suppression hearing; and
(3) The Court has determined that certification was improvidently granted as to the two trial issues, and the appeal as to those issues is dismissed.
Jurisdiction is not retained.