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

THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. CLAUDE HAMMOND, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

PER CURIAM.

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.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

STATE v. HAMMOND
(Dec 18, 1969)