State v. Carty

Decision Date30 April 2002
Citation174 N.J. 351,806 A.2d 798
PartiesSTATE of New Jersey, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Steven J. CARTY, Defendant-Respondent.
CourtNew Jersey Supreme Court
ORDER

The Supreme Court having filed its decision in the within matter on March 4, 2002, 170 N.J. 632, 790 A.2d 903, and the Court's opinion and judgment having provided that it should be retroactive to the June 23, 2000, date of the decision of the Appellate Division, 332 N.J.Super. 200, 753 A.2d 149,

And the Court having decided, sua sponte, to modify its judgment in respect of the issue of retroactivity,

And good cause appearing;

IT IS ORDERED that the Court's judgment shall apply to all cases pending in the trial court and on direct appeal as of June 23, 2000. The judgment does not apply to cases in which defendants had exhausted all avenues of direct review as of June 23, 2000.

Chief Justice PORITZ and Justices STEIN, COLEMAN, LONG, and ZAZZALI join in the Court's Order.

To continue reading

Request your trial
39 cases
  • State v. Dissent
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • September 7, 2010
    ...in crafting rules applicable to that factual scenario. For example, in State v. Carty, 170 N.J. 632, 790 A.2d 903, modified, 174 N.J. 351, 806 A.2d 798 (2002), the court observed that, ''[i]n the context of motor vehicle stops, [in which] the individual is at the side of the road and confro......
  • State v. Caronna
    • United States
    • New Jersey Superior Court — Appellate Division
    • November 3, 2021
    ...of a vehicle's passenger compartment); see also State v. Carty, 170 N.J. 632, 635, 790 A.2d 903, modified on other grounds, 174 N.J. 351, 806 A.2d 798 (2002) (declining to follow Schneckloth, 412 U.S. 218, 93 S.Ct. 2041, and finding that there must be a reasonable and articulable suspicion ......
  • State v. Carter
    • United States
    • New Jersey Supreme Court
    • August 2, 2021
    ...activity before they may request consent to search a car stopped for a motor vehicle infraction), modified on other grounds, 174 N.J. 351, 806 A.2d 798 (2002) ; State v. Mollica, 114 N.J. 329, 344-45, 554 A.2d 1315 (1989) (finding a privacy interest in hotel-room telephone toll or billing r......
  • State v. Rankin
    • United States
    • Washington Supreme Court
    • June 10, 2004
    ...he claims support his position. First, he broadly argues that in State v. Carty, 170 N.J. 632, 635, 790 A.2d 903, modified, 174 N.J. 351, 806 A.2d 798 (2002), New Jersey's Supreme Court held that any officer contact with occupants of a vehicle is so inherently coercive that any consent give......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT