The Supreme Court has announced that it has granted review in three more cases. Two of them resulted from unpublished Appellate Division rulings in cases where police officers are the plaintiffs, and the third is from a published opinion in a criminal case.
The criminal appeal is State v. Miller. The decision below, in which a three-judge panel affirmed defendant’s convictions on two counts of child endangerment by possessing and distributing child pornography, but remanded for resentencing, was reported at 449 N.J. Super. 460 (App. Div. 2017). The question presented, as phrased by the Supreme Court Clerk’s Office, is “Did the application of aggravating factor one amount to impermissible double-counting for the purpose of defendant’s sentence; and do defendant’s convictions for fourth-degree possession of child pornography and second-degree distribution of child pornography merge?” This issue relates to the remand for resentencing, as to which the Appellate Division agreed with defendant.
The first of the two police officer plaintiff cases is Caraballo v. City of Jersey City Police Dep’t. The question presented there is “Under the circumstances presented, can plaintiff maintain a claim of failure to accommodate under the Law Against Discrimination, N.J.S.A. 10:5-1 to -49, based on the denial of a benefit in a contemporaneous workers’ compensation matter?” In the Appellate Division, a two-judge panel reversed a Law Division decision to grant summary judgment in favor of defendant. The Supreme Court will now review that ruling.
In the third case granted review, In re Corey Corbo, Union City Police Dep’t, the question presented is “Was there competent evidence adduced at the hearing to prove the police officer’s ingestion of cocaine and, if not, is the police department entitled to a remand to correct the evidentiary deficiencies?” The case arose out of administrative proceedings, in which an Administrative Law Judge had issued an initial decision removing Corbo as a police officer because he had ingested cocaine. The Civil Service Commission issued a final decision upholding that ruling. Corbo appealed to the Appellate Division, which reversed, finding that “no competent evidence was adduced” to support the decision removing Corbo as a police officer.