State v. Laurick

1 Analyses of this case by attorneys

  1. The Supreme Court Will Address “Not Raised Below,” and Three Criminal Appeals

    Lite DePalma Greenberg, LLCBruce D. GreenbergOctober 25, 2018

    The Supreme Court’s decision may provide clarity as to when issues not raised below will be considered, though the matter could be decided without specifically addressing that.In State v. Bryant, the question presented is “Under the circumstances presented, did the plea agreement and related proceedings entitle defendant to a sentence of drug court probation or to withdraw his plea?” Both the Law Division and the Appellate Division, the latter in a two-judge unpublished opinion, rejected defendant’s position.State v. Patel presents this question “In this matter seeking post-conviction relief pursuant to State v. Laurick, 120 N.J. 1 (1990), was defendant required to show that, had he been notified of his right to counsel in a prior matter, the result of the proceeding likely would have been different?” In a two-judge unpublished opinion, the Appellate Division, applying State v. Schadewald, 400 N.J. Super. 350 (App. Div. 2007), ruled that defendant had to show that the result would have been different, and that no such showing had been made.