Court Opinion

ID: 9755835
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-28 20:53:07.624371+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:28:11.902904
License: Public Domain

*195Weintraub, C. J.
(concurring). For the reasons given in my separate opinions in Gleitman v. Cosgrove, 49 N. J. 22, 55 (1967), and State v. Baird, 50 N. J. 376, 380 (1967), I believe the statute is an incomplete expression of legislative will, that it is the legislative branch which should decide what ought to constitute “lawful justification,” and henee I would declare the statute invalid. However, since the majority in both cases were obviously of another view, I am obliged to approach this case on the assumption that the statute is constitutional and that no “lawful justification” existed for the planned abortion. On that basis I reach the question whether the conspiracy was beyond the statute because the woman the defendants planned to abort was in fact not pregnant. As to that issue, I join in the opinion of Mr. Justice Proctor.
For affirmance — Chief Justice Weintratjb and Justices Jacobs, Francis, Proctor, Hall, Schettino and Haneman — 7.
For reversal —None.