Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Latif

Decided: May 30, 1975.

STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
JOHN H. LATIF, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT



Leonard, Seidman and Bischoff. The Opinion of the Court was delivered by Bischoff, J.A.D.

Bischoff

Defendant was indicted by the Essex County Grand Jury on September 1, 1970 for robbery of $280 from an employee of Seaboard Finance Company in violation of N.J.S.A. 2A:141-1, and he was indicted on September 10, 1970 for robbery of $100 from an employee of Western Union Telegraph Company in violation of the same statute by the same grand jury.

He was tried and convicted by a jury in January 1974 for both crimes in separate trials. Defendant appeals from both convictions and the sentences imposed, raising (with but one exception) the same issues in both appeals. We will dispose of both appeals in this opinion.

Defendant contends:

(a) he was denied his constitutional right to a speedy trial. (This issue was not raised in the trial court.);

(b) it was plain error for the trial court to fail to conduct a voir dire on the issue of identification;

(c) he was not given the " Miranda " warnings when apprehended and subsequent statements made by him were in violation of his constitutional privilege against self-incrimination;

(d) he was ineffectively represented and, thus, denied adequate assistance of counsel; and,

(e) as to the trial of the indictment relating to the robbery of the Seaboard Finance Company, defendant also contends the admission of evidence of other acts or offenses allegedly committed by him was error.

We are satisfied from our review of the records and the arguments that these issues are clearly without merit. R. 2:11-3(e)(2).

In addition thereto, the defendant contends there was error in that:

(1) he did not possess the requisite mental capacity to waive his constitutional right against self-incrimination and the admission of statements made ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.