Case Name: STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. CHARLES STILES, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR
Court: New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1921-02-28
Citations: 95 N.J.L. 550
Docket Number: 
Parties: STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. CHARLES STILES, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR.
Judges: For affirmance — None.
Reporter: New Jersey Law Reports
Volume: 95
Pages: 550–551

Head Matter:
STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. CHARLES STILES, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR.
Argued November 17, 1920
Decided February 28, 1921.
On appeal from the Supreme Court.
For the plaintiff in error, Glarence L. Gole.
For the defendant in error, Daniel W. B'eclcley, prosecutor of the pleas.

Opinion:
Pee Curiam.
The question raised and argued on the writ of error in this case has been considered in the case of State v. Fisher, No. 35 of this present November term, 1920 (ante p. 419); and, for the reason stated in the opinion in that case, the judgment of affirmance brought up from the Supreme Court on this unit of error must be reversed, to the end that a new trial may be granted in the Quarter Sessions.
For affirmance — None.
For reversal — The ChaNCellor, Swayzb, TreNCI-tard, BARKER, BERGEN, KATZENBACII, WHITE, HePPENHEIMER, WilliaMs, Taylor, GaruNeu, AokbesoN, JJ. 13.