State v. Shahadi.
| Decision Date | 10 September 1948 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 202 and 204.,s. 202 and 204. |
| Citation | 61 A.2d 301,137 N.J.L. 623 |
| Parties | STATE v. SHAHADI. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Albert N. Shahadi was indicted for misconduct in office, his motion to quash the indictment was denied and he brings certiorari.
Writ of certiorari dismissed.
May term, 1948, before BODINE, HEHER and WACHENFELD, JJ.
Lewis P. Scott, of Atlantic City (David R. Brone, of Atlantic City, of counsel), for plaintiff-respondent.
Maurice Y. Cole, of Atlantic City, for defendant-prosecutor.
The question propounded by this motion to quash is whether two indictments returned by the grand jury against the prosecutor are fatally deficient for failure to charge a crime and for being vague and uncertain and not apprising the defendant of the nature and cause of the accusation made against him.
A comprehensive disposition of these issues requires reference to portions of the instrument to determine its legal efficacy and whether constitutional rights are violated as alleged. The pertinent questions involved, both factual and legal, are common to both indictments and by stipulation both will be disposed of by the consideration of the one known as the ‘Ehret’ indictment.
The gist of the accusation is that the defendant, being Police Recorder of Atlantic City and required by virtue of his office to conduct trials of persons charged with violating the provisions of the motor vehicle laws, was guilty of misconduct in the performance of that duty.
The indictment sets forth that one Ehret was arrested and ‘charged with operating a motor vehicle * * * while under the influence of intoxicating liquors * * *; That the names of three police officers * * * were written on a Police Department memorandum annexed to and made a part of the complaint against the said Ehret, as the names of witnesses who would appear and testify at the hearing to be conducted involving the said Ehret, and the aforesaid complaint together with annexed memorandum was in the possession, custody and control of the said Albert N. Shahadi, he well knowing the aforesaid witnesses were police officers and prepared to give testimony relative to the said charges against the said Ehret; That, nevertheless, * * * in the Recorder's Court of Atlantic City, the said Albert N. Shadahi did unlawfully, wilfully, maliciously and corruptly free and discharge the said Ehret from the charges aforesaid without calling the said Stanford, Shepperson and Allman, then and there...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Crosson
...be an act of malfeasance in office, seems equally certain.' The court held the indictment good. The People also cite State v. Shahadi, 137 N.J.L. 623, 61 A.2d 301. The defendant in that case was the police recorder of Atlantic City, who was required by virtue of his office to conduct trials......
-
State v. Shahadi.
...was indicted for misconduct in office, his motion to quash the indictment was denied and he brings certiorari. Writ dismissed. See also 61 A.2d 301. May term, 1948, before BODINE, HEHER and WACHENFELD, JJ. Lewis P. Scott, of Atlantic City (David R. Brone, of Atlantic City, of counsel), for ......