email from court Decision on Congo

[Guest guest]

This doesn't look good.Michael.Stellwag wrote: Michael.StellwagDate: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:58:41 -0400I have received your email. The Court has asked that I respond with thebelow attachment. Thank you.(See attached file: Ex Parte Letter - Congo case (email).pdf)Michael G. StellwagTeam Leader for Judge Ostrer - Criminal DivisionMercer County Courthouse209 South Broad Street - Room 102Trenton, NJ 08650(609) 571-4025, Fax# (609) 571-4073 Re: State v. Elizabeth James (Congo) Appeal No. 48-2007; Docket No. 18146 To Whom It May Concern: Thank you for your recent

letter regarding the above-mentioned case. However, I may not consider it. In deciding the above case, I am restricted to considering the Municipal Court record and the submissions and arguments of the parties. I trust you will appreciate that this is designed to assure fairness to both sides. As our Supreme Court has stated, "In any proceeding that is judicial in nature … the process of decision must be governed by the basic principle of the exclusiveness of the record.… Of what real worth is the right to present evidence and to argue its significance at a formal hearing, if the one who decides the case may stray at will from the record in reaching his decision? Or consult another’s findings of fact, or conclusion of law, or recommendations or even hold conferences with him?" Mazza v. Cavicchia, 15 N.J. 513, 514 (1954). Unrelated third parties, even if intensely interested in the outcome of a case, may not participate, unless they

have formally requested, met the standards for, and been granted friend-of-the-court status. See R. 1:13-9 (setting forth the procedure for requesting and the standards for granting amicus curiae status). All of these restrictions are designed to assure that any decision by the court is reached fairly and satisfies the basic elements of due process. Thank you again for your interest. Very truly yours, Mitchel E. Ostrer, JSC http://pets.Fortheanimals7/join