State v. M.N.
New Jersey Superior Court
267 N.J. Super. 482 (1993)
- Written by Carolyn Strutton, JD
Facts
Twelve-year-old M.N. (defendant) found a book of matches on his way to his school-bus stop one morning. As he walked to the bus stop, taking shortcuts through other people’s properties, M.N. lit the matches one at a time, blew them out, and threw them on the ground. M.N. threw one of these matches toward a pile of leaves that was near a neighbor’s boat, parked near the neighbor’s garage. Later that morning, another neighbor noticed that the boat and the garage were on fire. The boat was destroyed, and the garage and other property were extensively damaged in the fire. The fire investigation eventually led to M.N. because of the route he was known to take through the property on his way to the bus stop. M.N. eventually admitted to lighting the match and throwing it near the boat but denied any intention to start a fire. M.N. was charged in a delinquency complaint with actions that if committed by an adult would constitute third-degree arson and third-degree criminal mischief. The family-court judge concluded that M.N. did not purposely set the boat or the garage on fire but found him guilty of third-degree arson based on his purposeful lighting of the match. M.N. was sentenced to two years of probation and ordered to complete 100 hours of community service. M.N. appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Shebell, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
