State v. Bell, No. 6.
| Court | United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey) |
| Writing for the Court | PER CURIAM |
| Citation | 188 A. 737 |
| Parties | STATE v. BELL et al. |
| Decision Date | 05 January 1937 |
| Docket Number | No. 6. |
STATE
v.
BELL et al.
No. 6.
Supreme Court of New Jersey.
Jan. 5, 1937.
Error to Court of Quarter Sessions, Passaic County.
James Jackson Bell and others were convicted of violation of the Gangster Act, and they bring error.
Judgment affirmed.
Argued January term, 1936, before BROGAN, C. J., and LLOYD and DONGES, JJ.
Albert J. Shea, of Hoboken, and John W. Ockford, of Union City, for plaintiffs in error.
Arthur C. Dunn, of Paterson, for defendant in error.
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiffs in error were convicted at the Passaic county quarter sessions upon an indictment under what may be called the Gangster Act, chapter 155, P.L.1934 (N.J. St.Annual 1934, § 52—43r(12) et seq.). The indictment contained two counts, one under section 3 of the act (N.J.St.Annual 1934, § 52-43r(14), and the other under section 4 (N.J.St.Annual 1934, § 52—43r (15). The first count under section 3 was dismissed with the consent of the state's attorney.
The first section of this act (N.J.St. Annual 1934, § 52—43r(12) declares a gangster to be an enemy of the state. The second section (N.J.St.Annual 1934, § 52—43r(13), with certain exceptions, declares any person having possession of a machine gun is a gangster. The third section (N.J.St.Annual 1934, § 52—43r (14) pertains to convicted persons apprehended while carrying a deadly weapon without a permit. The fourth section (N. J.St. Annual 1934, § 52—43r(15), under which the convictions were had, is as follows:
"4. Any person, not engaged in any lawful occupation, known to be a member of any gang consisting of two or more persons, who has been convicted at least three times of being a disorderly person, or who has been convicted of any crime, in this or in any other State, is declared to be a gangster; provided, however, that nothing in this section contained shall
in any wise be construed to include any participant or sympathizer in any labor dispute."
The state offered evidence to prove that the plaintiffs in error were arrested while occupying, along with four other men, a small house in Wayne township, Passaic county. The place was raided by the state police, detectives from the office of the county prosecutor, as well as police officers from New York and from the local township. The raid occurred on Sunday morning at S:30 o'clock on June 23, 1935. A search of the premises uncovered several loaded revolvers, a loaded rifle, a gas riot gun and its accompanying equipment, a handbag containing two German Luger pistols, loaded, and a supply of ammunition. Some of these weapons were recognized as having been stolen, one from an officer of Cumberland county, and one from a salesman of police equipment in West New York. There were two automobiles outside the house, one carrying stolen license plates. Records of criminal convictions in New York were offered and received in evidence.
We are of the opinion that there was ample evidence to support the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ex parte Zee
...constitutional boundaries, as a matter of necessary public policy. State v. Pius, 118 N.J.L. 212, 192 A. 89 (Sup.Ct.1937); State v. Bell, 188 A. 737, 15 N.J.Misc. 109 (Sup.Ct.1937), affirmed State v. Gaynor, 119 N.J.L. 582, 197 A. 360 (E. & Coming now to the claimed unconstitutionality of t......
-
Lanzetta v. State New Jersey, No. 308
...prison for not more than ten years and not less than five years, at hard labor. On the authority of its recent decision in State v. Bell, 188 A. 737, 15 N.J.Misc. 109, the Supreme Court entered judgment affirming the conviction. State v. Pius, 118 N.J.L. 212, 192 A. 89. The Court of Errors ......
-
State v. Gaynor, No. 2.
...and others were convicted of violation of the Gangster Act, and to review a judgment of the Supreme Court which affirmed their conviction, 188 A. 737, IS N.J. Misc. 109, they bring Affirmed. John W. Ockford, of Union City, for plaintiffs in error. Arthur C. Dunn, Prosecutor of the Pleas, of......
-
State v. Burkitt, No. 17720.
...in 1898, and we think it clearly sound under the police power of the state. State v. Griffin, 84 N.J.L. 429, 87 A. 138; State v. Bell, 188 A. 737, 15 N.J.Misc. 109; Levine v. State, 110 N.J.L. 467, 166 A. 300. Finally the argument is made that the conduct of the trial was unfair, and the ve......
-
Ex parte Zee
...constitutional boundaries, as a matter of necessary public policy. State v. Pius, 118 N.J.L. 212, 192 A. 89 (Sup.Ct.1937); State v. Bell, 188 A. 737, 15 N.J.Misc. 109 (Sup.Ct.1937), affirmed State v. Gaynor, 119 N.J.L. 582, 197 A. 360 (E. & Coming now to the claimed unconstitutionality of t......
-
Lanzetta v. State New Jersey, No. 308
...prison for not more than ten years and not less than five years, at hard labor. On the authority of its recent decision in State v. Bell, 188 A. 737, 15 N.J.Misc. 109, the Supreme Court entered judgment affirming the conviction. State v. Pius, 118 N.J.L. 212, 192 A. 89. The Court of Errors ......
-
State v. Gaynor, No. 2.
...and others were convicted of violation of the Gangster Act, and to review a judgment of the Supreme Court which affirmed their conviction, 188 A. 737, IS N.J. Misc. 109, they bring Affirmed. John W. Ockford, of Union City, for plaintiffs in error. Arthur C. Dunn, Prosecutor of the Pleas, of......
-
State v. Burkitt, No. 17720.
...in 1898, and we think it clearly sound under the police power of the state. State v. Griffin, 84 N.J.L. 429, 87 A. 138; State v. Bell, 188 A. 737, 15 N.J.Misc. 109; Levine v. State, 110 N.J.L. 467, 166 A. 300. Finally the argument is made that the conduct of the trial was unfair, and the ve......