Case Name: STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. HAROLD PHILLIPS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF HAROLD PHILLIPS, APPELLANT, FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
Court: Supreme Court of New Jersey
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1961-01-23
Citations: 34 N.J. 63
Docket Number: 
Parties: STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. HAROLD PHILLIPS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF HAROLD PHILLIPS, APPELLANT, FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Reports
Volume: 34
Pages: 63–63

Head Matter:
STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. HAROLD PHILLIPS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF HAROLD PHILLIPS, APPELLANT, FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS.
Argued January 9, 1961
Decided January 23, 1961.
Mr. William 0. Brudnick, Special Assistant Prosecutor, argued the cause for plaintiff-respondent (Mr. Guy W. Calissij Bergen County Prosecutor, attorney).
Mr. Ojiarles Handler argued the cause for appellant.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The judgment is affirmed for the reasons expressed by the Appellate Division. 62 N. J. Super. 70 (1960). Moreover, we conclude that the record reveals no substantial state or federal constitutional question which would justify direct appeal to this Court. R. R. 1:2-1; Colacurcio Contracting Corp. v. Weiss, 20 N. J. 258 (1955); Starego v. Soboliski, 11 N. J. 29 (1952).
For affirmance—Chief Justice Weintraub, and Justices Jacobs, Prancis, Proctor, Hall, Schettino and Hangman—7.
For reversal—Hone.