Opinion · Supreme Court of New Jersey
State v. Carty
174 N.J. 351
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of New Jersey
- Jurisdiction
- New Jersey
- Date
- 2002-04-30
- Topic
- bankruptcy
How later courts describe this case
- declining to follow Schneckloth, 412 U.S. 218, and finding that 21 A-0580-20 there must be a reasonable and articulable suspicion of criminal wrongdoing as a prerequisite to requesting consent to search a vehicle after a routine stop for a motor vehicle violation
- even a consent search after a traffic stop requires reasonable and articulable suspicion of criminal activity
- "A motor vehic[le] violation, no matter how minor, justifies a stop without any reasonable suspicion that the motorist has committed a crime or other unlawful act."
- "A motor vehic[le] violation, no matter how minor, justifies a stop without any reasonable suspicion that the motorist has committed a crime or other unlawful act." (citing Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648, 663 (1979
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed State v. Carty. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 62 opinions
ORDER
The Supreme Court having filed its decision in the within matter on March 4, 2002, 170 N.J. 632, 790 A.2d 903, and the Court’s opinion and judgment having provided that it should be retroactive to the June 23, 2000, date of the decision of the Appellate Division, 332 N.J.Super. 200, 753 A.2d 149,
And the Court having decided, sua sponte, to modify its judgment in respect of the issue of retroactivity,
And good cause appearing;
IT IS ORDERED that the Court’s judgment shall apply to all cases pending in the trial court and on direct appeal as of June 23, 2000. The judgment does not apply to cases in which defendants had exhausted all avenues of direct review as of June 23, 2000.
Chief Justice PORITZ and Justices STEIN, COLEMAN, LONG, and ZAZZALI join in the Court’s Order.