Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Hackett

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division

Decided July 26, 1999Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

STEINBERG, J.A.D.,

concurring in part; dissenting in part.

I respectfully dissent from that portion of the opinion that reverses defendant’s conviction for third-degree endangering the welfare of a child. The majority concludes that the State did not present any evidence that defendant’s conduct would tend to impair or debauch the morals of a child as is required to convict under N.J.S.A. 2C:24-4(a). Like its predecessor, N.J.S.A. 2A:96-3, the statute is designed to protect children under the age of sixteen. State v. White, 105 N.J.Super. 234, 236, 251 A.2d 766 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 54…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. State v. DavisSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1975
  2. State v. GallowaySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1993
  3. State v. ColeSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1990
  4. Jacobitti v. JacobittiSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1994
  5. Brock v. Public Service Electric & Gas Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1997

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API