Legal Opinion

State v. Smith

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided January 27, 2009No. A-93 September Term 2007PublishedCited by 43 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice LaVECCHIA

This appeal raises the question whether a defendant must know that a weapon is defaced to be convicted of the offense of possession of a defaced weapon, contrary to N.J.S.A. 2C:39-3(d).

In October 2002, defendant Jama Smith was observed in the City of Paterson participating in a drug transaction, which led ultimately to his conviction for possession of a defaced weapon. On appeal, defendant contended that he was denied a fair trial because the court’s jury instruction on that offense failed to require a finding that defendant knew the firearm was defaced. The Appellate Division rejected that…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. DiProspero v. PennSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2005
  2. State v. NataleSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2005
  3. State v. ButlerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1982
  4. State v. ChaplandSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2006
  5. State v. LeeSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1984

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

3Cited by43 opinions

  1. State v. GandhiSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2010
  2. US Bank National Ass'n v. GuillaumeSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2012
  3. State v. LawlessSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2013
  4. State v. GaliciaSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2012
  5. State v. James Grate State v. Fuquan Cromwell (072750)Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2015

38 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