Error v. Menzel
| Decision Date | 03 September 1948 |
| Docket Number | No. 39.,39. |
| Citation | 137 N.J.L. 616,61 A.2d 237 |
| Parties | STATE of N.J., Defendant in Error, v. Richard MENZEL, Plaintiff-in-Error. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Error to Supreme Court.
Benjamin M. Ratner, of Newark, for plaintiff in error.
Duane E. Minard, Jr., of Newark, for defendant in error.
The judgment under review herein is affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by Mr. Chief Justice Case in the Supreme Court, 136 N.J.L. 233, 52 A.2d 674.
For affirmance: The CHANCELLOR, Justices BODINE, DONGES, JACOBS, EASTWOOD, and BURLING, and Judges WELLS, DILL, FREUND, McLEAN, and SCHETTINO-11.
For reversal: None.
To continue reading
Request your trial
2 cases
-
State v. Petrolia
...say that it raises 'an inference' of guilt. State v. Menzel, 136 N.J.L. 233, 52 A.2d 674 (Sup.Ct.1947), affirmed per curiam 137 N.J.L. 616, 61 A.2d 237 (E. & A.1948). And the latest expressions of the doctrine seem to be that such flight 'is a circumstance tending to prove consciousness of ......
-
State v. Centalonza, A--468
...v. Jaggers, 71 N.J.L. 281, 58 A. 1014 (E. & A. 1904); State v. Menzel, 136 N.J.L. 233, 52 A.2d 674 (Sup.Ct.1947) , affirmed 137 N.J.L. 616, 61 A.2d 237 (E. & A. 1948). But the court did not charge that flight raises a presumption of guilt; to the contrary, the jury were told that flight doe......