Posts Tagged ‘disorderly persons offense’
YOUR IPHONE PASSCODE IS NOT PROTECTED BY 5TH AMENDMENT SELF INCRIMINIATION
State v. Andrews Appellate Docket No.: A-72-18 Decided August 10, 2020 Submitted by New Jersey Criminal Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark In a recent New Jersey Supreme Court decision, the Court reviewed whether the requirement of a defendant to turnover his passcode to his iphone constituted a violation of the 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination. In State v.…
Read MoreDefendants can be forced to turn over phone passcodes, N.J.’s highest court rules
State v. Andrews Appellate Docket No.: A-72-18 Decided August 10, 2020 Submitted by New Jersey Criminal Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark In a recent New Jersey Supreme Court decision, the Court reviewed whether the requirement of a defendant to turnover his passcode to his iphone constituted a violation of the 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination. In State…
Read MoreKidnapping Under the Statute While a Sex Assault Occurred
State v. Hedgespeth Appellate Docket No.: A-0850-18T3 Decided August 3, 2020 Submitted by New Jersey Criminal Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark. In a recent decision approved for publication, the Appellate Division reviewed whether there was a kidnapping under the statute while a sex assault occurred. In State v. Hedgespeth, defendant was convicted of third-degree possession of a controlled…
Read MoreState v. Hreha and Motions to Suppress
State v. Hreha Appellate Docket No.: A-2744-19T3 Decided July 21, 2020 Submitted by New Jersey Drug Crime Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark In a recent unpublished decision, the Appellate Division overturned a trial court’s suppression of evidence recovered from an overdose victim’s cellphone which included text message from defendant implicating him in a drug deal that led…
Read MoreState v. Davis | On the Pitfalls of Sharing a Lawyer
State v. Davis Appellate Docket No.: A-2784-18T3 Decided July 21, 2020 Submitted by New Jersey Criminal Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark In a recent unpublished decision, the Appellate Division reviewed whether there was ineffective counsel for a law student, representing a defendant under the Court rules, was also court appointed to represent a codefendant for the same…
Read More