The New Jersey Supreme Court continued in relevant part: Federal courts have broadly held that Watts survived Booker and thus permit reliance on evidence of acquitted conduct by sentencing courts. But the practice of relying on acquitted conduct in sentencing has not gone unquestioned among federal judges, and approaches to the issue among state courts […]

Justice Pierre-Louis continued in relevant part: The Court reverses in Melvin and affirms in Paden-Battle. Article I, Paragraph 1 of the New Jersey Constitution bestows upon all citizens certain natural and unalienable rights. From those rights flows the doctrine of fundamental fairness, which protects against arbitrary and unjust government action. Fundamental fairness prohibits courts from […]

The New Jersey Supreme Court continued in relevant part: The trial judge abused his discretion by finding Melvin was the shooter by a preponderance of the evidence and considering that conduct in his sentencing decision.” At the retrial of the deadlocked counts, Melvin was acquitted of murder and aggravated assault, and the State dismissed the […]

On September 23, 2021, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided the Essex County companion cases of State v. v. Michelle Paden-Battle and State v. Mark Melvin. The principal issue concerned the sentencing judge’s consideration of conduct for which the defendants were acquitted by juries. Justice Pierre-Louis wrote for a unanimous court in relevant part: One […]

The New Jersey Supreme Court majority concluded with the following in relevant part: Here, the trial court should direct that Annese refrain from revealing that she is a parole officer or identifying herself as a law enforcement officer in her testimony on direct examination. Annese should explain her familiarity with defendant by stating that she […]

Justice Patterson continued in relevant part: Because this case has yet to be tried, it is unclear whether a change in defendant’s appearance between the date of the surveillance photograph and the date of trial is a relevant consideration. Accordingly, this second factor does not support or undermine a finding that N.J.R.E. 701’s second prong […]

The majority continued in relevant part: In State v. Lazo, the Court noted considerations identified by federal appellate courts deciding whether lay opinion testimony will assist the jury, as required by Fed. R. Evid. 701. 209 N.J. 9, 22-24 (2012). The Court again distills from federal cases factors that inform a trial court’s determination whether […]

Justice Patterson continued in relevant part: N.J.R.E. 701 was adopted to ensure that lay opinion is based on an adequate foundation. As amended in 2019, the rule provides that lay opinion testimony “may be admitted if it: (a) is rationally based on the witness’ perception; and (b) will assist in understanding the witness’ testimony or […]

The New Jersey Supreme Court continued in relevant part: A grand jury indicted defendant for felony murder and armed robbery, among other offenses. Defendant filed a pretrial motion to exclude Annese’s testimony. The trial court ruled that her testimony was inadmissible as lay opinion testimony under N.J.R.E. 701. It found that Annese’s testimony did not […]

On July 22, 2021, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided the Camden County case of State v. Damian Sanchez. Justice Patterson wrote for a 5-2 majority of the Court. The principal issue involved the application of evidence rules 701 and 403 to the identification of a parole officer’s identification of a photograph allegedly depicting the […]