This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: Farber v Jascalevich 78 N.J. 259; 394 A.2d 330; 1978 N.J. CASE SUM MARY PROCED U RAL POSTURE: Appellants challenged a determination of the Superior Court, Appellate Division (New Jersey), that they were in contempt of court for failure to disclose information sought by subpoenas duces tecum by appellee State of New Jersey in a criminal case. OVERV I EW: Appellants, a reporter and a news organization, were charged with contempt of court for failure to disclose information sought by subpoenas duces tecum by appellee State of New Jersey in a criminal case. Appellants contended they had a privilege to remain silent with respect to confidential information that emanated from the "free speech" and "free press" clauses of the U.S. Const. amend. I . The court on appeal held that the Supreme Court of the United States rejected a similar claim and held that no such r ight existed. Appellants also argued that a shield law, N.J. STAT. ANN. 2A:84A-21 and 21a applied. The court found the law constitutional on its face, but held that it violated the U.S. Const. amend. VI and the N.J. Const. art. 1, para. 10, as applied to the facts of the case, by denying a criminal defendant the r ight to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses. OU TCO M E: The court affi rmed that appellants were in contempt of court because the state constitutional guarantee of a criminal defendant's r ight to confront witnesses prevailed over the state statute granting privilege to newspersons regarding their sources of confidential information. ...
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 05/04/2010 for the course PLS 460 taught by Professor Lermack during the Spring '10 term at Bradley.
- Spring '10