State v. Pius, No. 5.
| Court | United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey) |
| Writing for the Court | PARKER, Justice. |
| Citation | 118 N.J.Law 212,192 A. 89 |
| Decision Date | 18 May 1937 |
| Docket Number | No. 5. |
| Parties | STATE v. PIUS et al. |
118 N.J.Law 212
STATE
v.
PIUS et al.
No. 5.
Supreme Court of New Jersey.
May 18, 1937.
Syllabus by the Court.
1. Alleged errors of law at a criminal trial, not brought up by suitable assignments of error, will not be considered in re view.
2. An assignment of error that the verdict below was contrary to the charge of the court points out no judicial action for re view.
3. Supplement to the Crimes Act, chap ter 155 of P.L.1934 (N.J.St.Annual 1934, § 52—43r(12) et seq.), held not unconstitution al on any ground argued in this case.
Error to Court of Quarter Sessions, of Cape May.
Frank Pius, alias, etc., and others were convicted of violations of the Gangster Act, and they bring error.
Affirmed.
Argued May term, 1937, before BROGAN, C. J., and TRENCHARD and PARKER, JJ.
George R. Greis and Andrew Cafiero, for plaintiffs in error. French B. Loveland, Pros. of the Pleas, of Ocean City, and Herbert F. Campbell, Asst. Pros., of Cape May, C. H., for the State.
PARKER, Justice.
The three defendants were convicted as "gangsters" under an indictment based on section 4 of chapter 155 of the Laws of 1934 (P.L. p. 394, N.J.St.Annual 1934, § 52—43r(15). The section provides that "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," with a proviso not here applicable. Section 5 (N.J.St.Annual 1934, § 52—43r (16) provides as to the penalty: "Any person convicted of being a gangster under the provisions of this act shall be guilty of a high misdemeanor, and shall be punished by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or by imprisonment not exceeding twenty years, or both."
The case is before us on strict writ of error only and is of course considered in that aspect. The first principal ground for reversal now urged is based on the fourth assignment of error, that the court refused to direct an acquittal when so moved. This motion was made when the State rested, and again at the conclusion of all the evidence. In the first case the granting or denial of the motion was discretionary, and not reviewable on strict writ of error. Burnett v. State, 62 N.J. Law, 510, 41 A. 719; State v. Jaggers, 71 N.J.Law, 281, 283, 58 A. 1014, 108 Am.St. Rep. 746; State v. Metzger, 82 N.J.Law, 749, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. W. U. Tel. Co.
...U.S. 451, 59 S.Ct. 618, 83 L.Ed. 888 (1939), reversing State v. Pius, 120 N.J.L. 189, 198 A. 837 (E. & A.1938), affirming 118 N.J.L. 212, 192 A. 89 (Sup.Ct.1937). It is a fundamental rule of law that such a statute must be so written that intelligent men may know what acts of theirs will je......
-
Lanzetta v. State New Jersey, No. 308
...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 and Appeals affirmed, 120 N.J.L. 189, 198 A. 837, on the authority of its deci- Page 453 sion, State v. Gaynor, 119 N.J.......
-
Ex parte Zee
...scourge of habitual criminality, within 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......
-
State v. O'connor., No. 3.
...108 Am.St.Rep. 746; State v. Metzger, 82 N.J.L. 749, 82 A. 330; State v. Cohen, 97 N.J.L. 5, 116 A. 724; State v. Pius, 118 N.J.L. 212, 192 A. 89. Such action is reviewable, however, where the entire record of the proceedings had upon the trial has been returned by the plaintiff-in-error wi......
-
State v. W. U. Tel. Co.
...U.S. 451, 59 S.Ct. 618, 83 L.Ed. 888 (1939), reversing State v. Pius, 120 N.J.L. 189, 198 A. 837 (E. & A.1938), affirming 118 N.J.L. 212, 192 A. 89 (Sup.Ct.1937). It is a fundamental rule of law that such a statute must be so written that intelligent men may know what acts of theirs will je......
-
Ex parte Zee
...scourge of habitual criminality, within 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......
-
Lanzetta v. State New Jersey, No. 308
...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 and Appeals affirmed, 120 N.J.L. 189, 198 A. 837, on the authority of its deci- Page 453 sion, State v. Gaynor, 119 N.J.......
-
State v. O'connor., No. 3.
...108 Am.St.Rep. 746; State v. Metzger, 82 N.J.L. 749, 82 A. 330; State v. Cohen, 97 N.J.L. 5, 116 A. 724; State v. Pius, 118 N.J.L. 212, 192 A. 89. Such action is reviewable, however, where the entire record of the proceedings had upon the trial has been returned by the plaintiff-in-error wi......