Opinion

State v. Brown

  • 111 N.J.L. 595
  • 169 A. 185
  • 1933 N.J. LEXIS 397
Court
Supreme Court of New Jersey
Filed
Nov 23, 1933
Status
Published
On the bench
PER CURIAM.
Cited by
1 cases
Authority
More cited than 67.8%

The opinion

Pee Curiam.

The jury empaneled and sworn to try the defendant on a charge of murder was allowed to separate. When the error was discovered the jury was recalled.

“We likewise adopt as fundamentally sound the concluding statement of the Chief Justice that, in a case in which the life of the accused is at stake, the sequestering of the jury during the continuance of the trial is a ‘requisition of absolute law, and is not, in any measure, a matter resting in the discretion of the court.’ A rule of procedure rooted in tradition and precedent, devised for the protection alike of society and the accused, should not be set aside.”

State

v.

O’Leary,

110

N. J. L.

36.

The judgment is reversed to the end that there may be a

venire de novo.

For affirmance

— None.

For reversal

— The Chancellor, Trenchakd, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Donges, Heher, Peeskie, Kays, Heteield, Dear, Wells, Dill, JJ. 14.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.