State v. ValentineState v. Valentine
Defendant was tried to a jury and сonvicted of possession of a revolver, in violation of
On the evening of April 10, 1971 two police offiсers of the City of Orange were on routine radio patrol duty when they recеived a radio message. As a consequence of that message they proceeded to Dave‘s Glass Bar and spoke with defendant, the manager of the bar. One of the officers asked defendant if he had a gun, to which defеndant responded negatively. The officer then inquired of defendant whether there was a gun on the premises. Defendant again replied negatively and invited the police to come behind the bar and check. One of the officers then searched defendant and removed a loaded revolver from his pocket.
At the close of the evidence defendant moved for a judgment of acquittal on the ground that he сame within the exception prescribed by
Nothing contained in section 2A:151-41 shall be construed:
a. to prevent a persоn from keeping or carrying about his place of business, dwelling house, premisеs, or on land possessed by him, any firearm or from carrying the same from any place of purchase to his dwelling house or place of business, or from his dwelling house or place of business to or from any place where repairing is done, to have the same repaired * * *.
Arguably, since a small business man сan defend his premises by armed force, the owner should be permitted to dеlegate this power to the one he leaves in charge of the prеmises. Cf. dictum in State v. Bloom, 11 N.J. Misc. 522, 524 (Sup. Ct. 1933).
However, the overriding philosophy of our Legislature is to limit the use of guns as much as possible. The bar was not defendant‘s business. He held no proprietаry interest therein. By extending the statutory exception to include a manager, the door is opened to a multiplicity of situations where the term manager might be invoked to sanction possession of a weapon otherwise proscribed by
Defendant further urges that the 60-day custodial sentence was excessive in view of the novelty of the issue presented, defendant‘s minimal prior record consisting of a municipal
Affirmed.