that the Supreme Court would prohibit plea bargaining in the case where a defendant possessed a small amount of marijuana, but would allow a bargain when the owner of a vehicle knowingly allowed a drunk person to drive their automobile.” The prefatory description of the offenses covered by the Guideline was not intended to be a definitive substantive description of each of the offenses subject to the plea bargain prohibition. Like the title of a statute, this general description is designed to identify the source of the substantive provisions that constitute the specific subject matter of the regulation. The title or general description of. a statute need not replicate each subject included within the statute. See Howard Savings Inst. v. Kielb, 38 N.J. 186, 200, 183 A.2d 401 (1962) (<HOLDING>); State v. Greene, 33 N.J.Super. 497, 500, 111
holding that the title of an act is not an index but is merely a label holding that the act is not retroactive holding that the act is retroactive holding that a controversy that is a labor dispute within the meaning of the massachusetts act is not taken outside the scope of that act merely because it also involves breaches of an employment contract recognizing that a state courts determination is not an unreasonable application of law merely because it is erroneous