Recent cases:
1. Engine compartment of car could not be searched without warrant
2. Newspaper here not entitled to legal fees under common law right of access claims to public records
3. State had an affirmative duty to gather and disclose any relevant Brady/Giglio material from State's testifying witnesses
Recent cases:
1. Engine compartment of car could not be searched without warrant State v Cohen
Expanding the search to the engine compartment and trunk went beyond the scope of the automobile exception. Although the trooper smelled marijuana in the passenger compartment of the car, his initial search yielded no results and provided no justification “to extend the zone of the . . . search further than the persons of the occupants or the interior of the car.” State v. Patino, 83 N.J. 1, 14-15 (1980). As a result, the seized evidence should be suppressed. A-50-21
2. Newspaper here not entitled to legal fees under common law right of access claims to public records
Gannett Satellite Information Network, LLC v. Township of Neptune
The Court affirms as modified the Appellate Division’s judgment. The Court declines to adopt an exception to the American Rule for common law right of access claims to public records. Those claims impose significant burdens on municipal clerks and other records custodians; they require a careful balancing of competing interests and the application of an array of factors that can challenge even a seasoned judge. Imposing fee-shifting in this category of cases would venture far beyond the narrow exceptions to the American Rule that New Jersey courts have adopted to date. Accordingly, Gannett is not entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees in this appeal. A-63-21
3. State had an affirmative duty to gather and disclose any relevant Brady/Giglio material from State's testifying witnesses
Defendant appealed orders denying a forensic examination of the complainant's cellphone and discovery of complainant's employment and disciplinary records with the State Police in a quasi-criminal municipal court matter initiated by a civilian complainant. A verbal altercation developed between complainant and defendant. Police officer took statements about an ongoing property dispute. Complainant did not make any mention of traffic violations allegedly committed by defendant. Officer concluded the matter was a "civil issue" and no action was needed. A month later, complainant swore out a complaint against defendant for alleged traffic violations during the dispute. Defendant pled not guilty and requested discovery. Complainant only provided printed images of alleged traffic violations he recorded on his cellphone. State denied defendant's discovery requests as not relevant. Municipal judge entered a protective order barring discovery of complainant's records and employment information and forensic examination of the cellphone. Defendant appealed to the Law Division and State introduced an expungement order for the disciplinary and criminal records requested by defendant. Law Division denied defendant's request. Court reversed and remanded finding the records sought by defendant were relevant to impeachment evidence and State had an affirmative duty to gather and disclose any relevant Brady/Giglio material from State's testifying witnesses. Unreported Source Daily Briefing - 07-20-23
