State v. Ragland
Supreme Court of New Jersey
519 A.2d 1361 (1986)
Ragland (defendant) was charged with armed robbery and possession of a weapon by a convicted felon. At the end of the trial, the judge instructed the jury that it “must” find Ragland guilty of the offense if the jury found Ragland was carrying a weapon at the time of the robbery. The jury found that Ragland did indeed possess a weapon during the robbery and convicted him. On appeal, Ragland argued that the use of the word “must” was inconsistent with the jury’s nullification power. He also argued the instructions should inform the jury of its nullification powers, namely its power to acquit Ragland even if the State (plaintiff) had proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Wilentz, C.J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 166,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,800 briefs, keyed to 187 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.