Believe it or not, the law in question was written all the way back in 1921. The Legislature may, of course, modify the statute’s text.”Ī century ago? Yes. “Our task in this appeal has been to interpret the language of a statute enacted a century ago. In writing the unanimous decision, Justice Lee Solomon said: Even had he not, remember the rear window would still be allowed to be tinted. Of note is the prior testimony by one of the detectives that through a rear window that was said to be non-transparent he could see the suspicious movement in the car. On Tuesday, years after the incident, they found the stop improper in a 6-0 vote. Yet the Supreme Court allowed the appeal to be heard anyway because they knew it could affect future stops. They saw the writing on the wall.Īfter this driver had already spent a good amount of time in jail, they decided to vacate David Smith’s convictions. They realized the stop was not for reasonable suspicion. However, it was then on its way to the state Supreme Court. The case went before a judge followed by an appellate court and both times they sided with police and rejected the idea that the stop was improper. Meaning, sure, the gun was problematic but if they find it because they illegally stopped the car they cannot then bring charges for it. So that traffic stop, lawyers argued, should never have happened in the first place and the gun was what in legal circles is known as fruit of the poisonous tree. It does not apply to the back passenger windows or the back window. The actual tinted window law in New Jersey applies to the front windshield and the front passenger windows.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |