Many defendants convicted in State court proceedings will, after exhausting their State level appeals and post-conviction applications, seek habeas relief in Federal court. Generally speaking, the process focuses upon violations of Federal constitutional law in the underlying State proceedings, and is commenced by filing a habeas petition and supporting papers…
Maryland v. Kulbicki, No. 14-848 (2015), a recent US Supreme Court decision, helps to further define the concept of ineffective assistance of counsel for purposes of Sixth Amendment claims. The case is important for anyone considering a motion for post-conviction relief in State court or a habeas petition in Federal…
On December 2, 2015, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided State v. Watts. This decision, coming on the heels of the late-September decision of State v. Witt, may suggest a continuing erosion of a criminal defendant’s constitutional right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. The police obtained a…
Generally speaking, a motor vehicle is not protected from unreasonable searches and seizures to the same extent as a home. Our State’s Supreme Court has further reduced that level of protection. William Witt was pulled over on Route 48 in Carneys Point in Salem County in December 2012. Witt’s high…
The United States Supreme Court decided Grady v. North Carolina on March 30, 2015. After completing his prison term for sex offenses, the State determined that Grady was a recidivist sex offender, and wanted to place him on satellite-based monitoring. Grady argued that the monitoring program, which required him to…
The United States Supreme Court decided Rodriguez v. United States on April 21, 2015. The decision enhances Fourth Amendment protections in cases involving motor vehicle stops. Briefly, Rodriguez, the driver, and his passenger were stopped by a Valley, Nebraska police officer for veering onto the shoulder of a State highway…