LinkedIn Social Share

This is the second post that catches up with appellate developments last week and this week. The Supreme Court issued rulings in three cases during that period. Two of those appeals involved unanimous opinions. The third engendered a relatively rare 5-2 split among the Justices. Here are summaries:...

[Couldn't resist the title given last week's major blizzard in New Jersey] Last week was a big week for decisions in criminal appeals. All three of the Supreme Court's opinions last week, and both of last week's published Appellate Division opinions, were in criminal cases. Here are summaries....

This week saw one case decided by the Supreme Court and two published opinions of the Appellate Division. The Supreme Court case, decided by a 6-1 vote, presented an ex post facto issue arising out of amendments to the statute governing parole. The two Appellate Division decisions entailed more "core" criminal law issues. Here are summaries of those cases:...

State v. Hernandez-Peralta, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). Justice Wainer Apter's decision today for a 5-2 Supreme Court majority began by phrasing the issue presented. "In this appeal, we consider whether sentencing counsel was constitutionally ineffective for failing to investigate defendant's citizenship status beyond asking him if he was a United States citizen and receiving an unequivocal ‘yes,' and therefore not advising him that his plea could make him subject to deportation." The majority found, based on the particular facts, that counsel was not constitutionally ineffective, reversing the two lower courts. Justice Noriega, joined by Justice Fasciale, dissented....

The last seven days, an especially busy period for me, featured one Supreme Court opinion and two published Appellate Division decisions. Here are summaries of those rulings:...

In re Opinion No. 735 of the Supreme Court Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). [Disclosure: I represented an amicus curiae in this appeal]. As Justice Noriega said in his opinion for a 5-1 majority (Justice Pierre-Louis did not participate), this appeal "presents the narrow question of whether it is permissible under the Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC) for an attorney or law firm to purchase a competing attorney's or law firm's name as a keyword." The Court found it permissible, with a caveat. Justice Fasciale dissented....

It's time to catch up with the courts again. Last week, the Supreme Court issued two opinions, while the Appellate Division published one decision. Here are summaries:...