Legal Opinion · Dissent

Wright v. New Jersey

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided January 14, 1985No. 84-5060Published

1Dissent

Justice Brennan, with whom Justice Marshall joins,

dissenting.

The appellant Charles Wright was convicted of possessing an “exacto” knife. Under New Jersey law, possession of this sort of object is entirely legal in most circumstances; possession becomes unlawful only “under circumstances not manifestly appropriate for such lawful uses as it may have.” N. J. Stat. Ann. § 2C:39-5d (West 1982) (emphasis added).1 As construed by the state courts, although this statute requires proof that the defendant “knowingly” possessed the object in question, there is no requirement that he have done so with…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
  3. Connally v. General Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
  4. Kolender v. LawsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  5. Screws v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1945

15 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