Legal Opinion
State v. Lark
Supreme Court of New Jersey
Decided March 2, 2000PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
VERNIERO, J.
The judgment of the Appellate Division is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed in Judge Eichen’s opinion below. State v. Lark, 319 N.J.Super. 618, 726 A.2d 294 (App.Div.1999). We agree that defendant’s rights were violated and that the evidence of the drug offenses should be suppressed. We add only the following.
Routine or simple motor vehicle offenses will usually warrant only the issuance of a summons. As we previously explained, “police officers and law-enforcement officials should not assume that the statutory authorization…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- State v. DickeySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1998
- State v. PierceSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1994
- Gundaker Central Motors, Inc. v. GassertSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1956
- State v. MangoldSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1980
- State v. LarkNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1999
3Cited by16 opinions
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2001
- State v. ChapmanNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2000
- State v. TerrySupreme Court of New Jersey · 2018
- Shawn Brown v. Anthony MakofkaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2016
- State v. CartyNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2000
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.