Legal Opinion

State v. Martes

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division

Decided March 5, 1993PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STEINBERG, J.S.C.

I write this opinion to express my respectful disagreement with the opinion of another trial court in State v. Benford, 259 N.J.Super. 569, 614 A.2d 659 (Law Div.1992) and hold that the defendant may be convicted of burglary even though his purpose in entering an automobile is only to joyride, or in other words, to operate it and withhold the automobile temporarily from the owner rather than to permanently deprive the owner of possession thereof. Benford, supra, held that a defendant may not be convicted of burglary of an automobile if his intent at the time of the entry into *119…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. People v. SteppanIllinois Supreme Court · 1985
  2. State v. HudesNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1974
  3. State v. MangrellaNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1986
  4. State v. StephensSupreme Court of Florida · 1992
  5. State v. SubinNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1988

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Brundage v. Estate of CarambioSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2008
  2. State v. PantuscoNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2000
  3. Brundage v. Estate of CarambioSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2008
  4. JAMES KENNEDY, II, ETC. VS. WEICHERT CO. D/B/A WEICHERT REALTORS (L-2266-19, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2020

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

Powered by the Exa API