Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. DAVID SCHNEIDER AND JOHN T.SOJA, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

PER CURIAM.

Defendants were convicted of extortion. No appeal was pursued. About 31 months later a motion for a new trial was made on the ground of newly discovered evidence. Following the denial thereof an appeal was taken to the Appellate Division where the order was affirmed in a short per curiam opinion. Rehearing was applied for and refused. Defendants then appealed to this court, alleging that the original conviction resulted from the use of perjured testimony by the State and therefore constituted a denial of due process.

Our examination of the record satisfies us that the alleged constitutional issue is without substance. Consequently, appeal does not lie as a matter of right under R.R. 1:2-1(a). Nonetheless, we have studied the basic merits of the appeal and have reached the conclusion that the actions taken by the Appellate Division were correct.

The judgment is affirmed.

For affirmance — Chief Justice WEINTRAUB, and Justices JACOBS, FRANCIS, PROCTOR, HALL and SCHETTINO — 6.

For reversal — None.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

STATE v. SCHNEIDER
(Nov 21, 1960)