STATE OF NEW JERSEY V. ALNESHA MINITEE AND DARNELL BLAND A-5002-06T4/A-6213-06T4

STATE OF NEW JERSEY V. ALNESHA MINITEE AND
STATE OF NEW JERSEY V. DARNELL BLAND A-5002-06T4/A-6213-06T4 (consolidated)08-16-10


In these back-to-back appeals concerning the warrantless
search of a motor vehicle, we harmonize the seemingly
inconsistent holdings in State v. Martin, 87 N.J. 561 (1981) and
State v. Pena-Flores, 198 N.J. 6 (2009), by finding that the
exigent circumstances that existed at the scene only permitted
the police to seize the vehicle. Under our State's
Constitution, once impounded, the police were required to obtain
a warrant before searching the vehicle.

State v. Wendell Mann (A-56-09)

State v. Wendell Mann (A-56-09)8-4-10

The trial court fairly concluded that the police had
reasonable and articulable suspicion to support an
investigatory stop of defendant and that the seizure
of drugs from both locations was lawful.

State in the Interest of A.S. (A-58/59-09)

State in the Interest of A.S. (A-58/59-09) 7-29-10

Upon consideration of the totality of the
circumstances, A.S.’s confession was not knowingly,
intelligently, and voluntarily given. In addition,
the confession by far was the most damning piece of
evidence against A.S. and thus the court cannot say
that there was no reasonable possibility that its
introduction into evidence contributed to the
delinquency adjudication, and so, in the particular
circumstances presented in this case, the Court is
constrained to reverse A.S.’s conviction and remand
for new proceedings.