Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 New Jersey opinions name it 2 courts 2007–2025 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New Jersey courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Laurickred2 sentences2025Super. 476 , 1 Laurick, 120 N.J. at 13 , held that "an uncounseled conviction without waiver of the right to counsel is invalid for the purpose of increasing a defendant's loss of liberty. 2022The Laurick Court held “that an uncounseled conviction without waiver of the right to counsel is invalid for the purpose of increasing a defendant’s loss of liberty.” 120 N.J. at 16 . | 1 | 7 |
State v. Hrycakgreen1 sentence2024In the context of repeat DWI offenses, this means that the enhanced administrative penalties and fines may constitutionally be imposed but that in the case of repeat DWI convictions based on uncounseled prior convictions, the actual period of incarceration imposed may not exceed that for any counseled DWI convictions. [ 120 N.J. at 16 .] A-0836-22 8 The Court's holding in Laurick is grounded in a defendant's constitutional right to counsel. 120 N.J. at 11 ; see also State v. Konecny, 250 N.J. 321 , 338- 39 (2022) (noting Laurick applied in circumstances "where the defendant was not represented | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Jersey. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Nichols v. United States
green
2 sentences2019In Nichols v. United States, 511 U.S. 738 (1994), the United States Supreme Court overruled the plurality opinion in Baldasar and “held that an 4 The Court also expressed hope that, in the future, the judiciary’s computerized records would “permit storage of daily docket information for longer periods of time without space or storage problems” and that those records could be readily retrieved. 2007Later, however, in Nichols v. United States, 511 U.S. 738 , 114 S.Ct. 1921 , 128 L.Ed. 2d 745 (1994), the United States Supreme Court held that it is constitutionally permissible to enhance a sentence, even as to the length of imprisonment, on the basis of an uncounseled prior conviction. | 2 | 2007–2019 |
Rodriguez v. ROSENBLATT
red
1 sentence2021In the context of repeat DWI offenses, this means that the enhanced administrative penalties and fines may constitutionally be imposed but that in the case of repeat DWI convictions based on A-5605-18 21 uncounseled prior convictions, the actual period of incarceration imposed may not exceed that for any counseled DWI convictions. [Id. at 16 (emphasis added).] The Court's holding established a "constitutional limit" under our State Constitution: a "defendant may not suffer an increased period of incarceration as a result of a" violation of the principles established in Rodriguez v. Rosenblatt, | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Baldasar v. Illinois
red
2 sentences2007Laurick was decided in at least partial reliance on Baldasar v. Illinois, 446 U.S. 222 , 100 S.Ct. 1585 , 64 L.Ed. 2d 169 (1980), our Supreme Court being satisfied that, despite the lack of a majority opinion in Baldasar , it nevertheless articulated "a core value . . . that an uncounseled conviction without waiver of the right to counsel is invalid for the purpose of increasing a defendant's loss of liberty." Laurick, supra, 120 N.J. at 16 , 575 A. 2d 1340 . 2007Laurick was decided in at least partial reliance on Baldasar v. Illinois, 446 U.S. 222 , 100 S.Ct. 1585 , 64 L.Ed. 2d 169 (1980), our Supreme Court being satisfied that, despite the lack of a majority opinion in Baldasar , it nevertheless articulated "a core value . . . that an uncounseled conviction without waiver of the right to counsel is invalid for the purpose of increasing a defendant's loss of liberty." Laurick, supra, 120 N.J. at 16 , 575 A. 2d 1340 . | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.