2053 Woodbridge Avenue - Edison, NJ 08817

Monday, July 02, 2007

NJ Laws Newsletter E172 December 21, 2004

The 2004 Vercammen family wishes you great cheer!
In the true spirit of the holiday and Christmas season, may we all be thankful and share in the hope for peace on earth and goodwill toward all.
One of the pleasures during the holidays is the opportunity to thank our friends for their friendship. We are also thankful for the confidence clients have shown in us, and the friends who have referred people to our office.

May 2005 bring happiness and good health to you and those you love.

In this issue:

1. Fifteen month delay violates Speedy Trial
2 Conviction vacated where Law Division failed to make adequate findings.
3. NJ Law- 3B:10-2. To whom letters of administration granted if No Will
__________________________

1 Recent cases: [outlined from the NJ Municipal Court Law Review]
Fifteen month delay violates Speedy Trial State v. Monteagudo, Appellate Division, A-3249-02T3, April 30, 2004, not approved for publication.
Conviction in a trial de novo in the Law Division of driving while intoxicated reversed on speedy trial grounds and the charges dismissed; the defendant was arrested on March 24, 2001 in West New York, the case was transferred to Jersey City on April 27, 2001, the case was transferred to North Bergen in July or August 2002, and the Municipal Court trial was held on September 23, 2002; the Law Division found that the 15-month delay in Jersey City was "essentially unexplained" but that the circumstances that caused the delay were not "egregious" within the meaning of State v. Farrell; the Appellate Division disagreed and found this to be an egregious case lacking in justification. Source: 13 NJ Lawyer 998

2 Conviction vacated where Law Division failed to make adequate findings. State v. Rich ___ NJ Super. ____ Appellate Division A-1343-03T1, May 18, 2004, not approved for publication.
Convictions following a trial de novo for driving while intoxicated, failing to keep to the right, and possessing an open container of alcohol in a vehicle vacated and remanded; the Law Division failed to make adequate findings and applied an incorrect standard for review; the statement of facts, at best, set forth only some of the undisputed facts; it appeared that the Law Division had confused the appellate standards of review that apply to the Appellate Division with those that apply to the Law Division, and the Law Division's quotation from State v. Johnson was "telltale of it's misconception."
________________________

3. NJ Law- 3B:10-2. To whom letters of administration granted if No Will

If any person dies intestate, administration of the intestate's estate shall be granted to the surviving spouse of the intestate, if he or she will accept the administration, and, if not, or if there be no surviving spouse, then to the remaining heirs of the intestate, or some of them, if they or any of them will accept the administration, and, if none of them will accept the administration, then to any other person as will accept the administration.

If the intestate leaves no heirs justly entitled to the administration of his estate, or if his heirs shall not claim the administration within 40 days after the death of the intestate, the Superior Court or surrogate's court may grant letters of administration to any fit person applying therefor.

More information at http://www.njlaws.com/letters_of_administration_if_no_will.htm
_________________________________
Thank you for reading our newsletter! God Bless America USA #1
Kenneth Vercammen, Esq.
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
NEW PHONE 732-572-0500
New (Fax) 732-572-0030
website: www.njlaws.com
Free T- shirts and car coffee holders to all current and past clients. Please come into office.
Editor's Note and Disclaimer: All materials Copyright 2004. You may pass along the information on the NJ Laws Newsletter and website, provided the name and address of the Law Office is included.
Always schedule an office appointment with an experienced attorney when you have a legal matter. The Rules of Court limit an attorney's ability to discuss matters over the phone. If you have legal questions, you should schedule an in- office consultation.