On August 2, 2023, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided the Essex County case of State v. Roberson Burney. The principal issues concerned the admissibility of GPS and in-court identification testimony. Justice Pierre-Louis, my Rutgers Law classmate, wrote for the 5-2...
The 4-3 majority continued in relevant part: Campanella also testified, however, that the “white blip” on the video indicated “the defendant firing the handgun”; that a frame depicted the suspect “turning towards the officer”; that another view of the first muzzle...
Justice Patterson continued in relevant part: The Court reviews N.J.R.E. 701, which governs the admission of lay opinion testimony, and recent decisions in which the Court has applied Rule 701 to an officer’s testimony about a photo or video relating to an offense. In...
The Court continued in relevant part: During defendant’s trial, Officer McGhee testified, in part narrating the videos as they were played for the jury. Campanella testified later, describing the steps taken in the investigation. After the State indicated its intent...
On August 2, 2023, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided the Monmouth County case of State v. Dante C. Allen. The principal issue before the Court concerned whether the defendant was denied a fair trial because the trial court permitted a detective to present lay...
The New Jersey Supreme Court continued in relevant part: Applying those principles to the newly revised LAP, the Court sets forth guidelines and factors to assist trial courts in deciding whether VRI should be used during criminal jury trials. Consistent with New...
Justice Pierre-Louis continued in relevant part: In 2017, the Judiciary implemented the LAP to ensure all people, including persons with limited English proficiency, have equal access to court proceedings. And the Court has consistently recognized the significance of...
The New Jersey Supreme Court continued in relevant part: In a criminal jury trial, there is a presumption that foreign language interpretation services will be provided in person, which is consistent with the New Jersey Judiciary’s longstanding practice. The Court...
On August 15, 2023, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided the Hudson County case of State v. Oscar Juracan-Juracan. The principal issue before the Court concerned whether the defendant was entitled to in-person as opposed to remote interpreting services during his...
The three-judge panel concluded with the following in relevant part: Of course, should plaintiff ever be subjected to the threat of violence at the hands of a third party, he will not be without recourse. In Stimler, a small group of rabbis were convicted of...