On Aug. 9, 2018, our Supreme Court handed down a decision in State v. Fuqua that we believe was in error as set forth in the dissents of Chief Justice Rabner and Justice Albin (joined in by Justice LaVecchia).

In this 4-3 decision, the court held that to convict a defendant of the second-degree crime of endangering the welfare of a child under N.J.S.A. §2C:24-4(a), the state did not have to prove that a child suffered actual harm. Rather, it was sufficient for the state to prove that a child was exposed to a “substantial risk of harm.” Accordingly, the court affirmed denial of the defendant’s motion for a judgment of acquittal.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]