The New Jersey Supreme Court concluded in relevant part: Once the corresponding entry is located within Exhibit S-152, the prosecutor is to “copy and paste” that row of data into a new document. The AIR number from that entry must then be compared against the Dennis...
Justice Noriega continued in relevant part: The Special Adjudicator filed a comprehensive 370-page report detailing his findings of fact and conclusions of law, which the Court summarizes. The parties largely agree with the Special Adjudicator’s findings and...
On August 8, 2024, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided the Ocean County case of State v. Zingis. The principal issue concerned the procedure for challenging Trooper Dennis cases through post-conviction relief proceedings during the pendency of a subsequent DWI...
The New Jersey Supreme Court continued in relevant part: We concur with the Appellate Division that it might not be possible for the Division to make the required showing in a different set of circumstances, such as a setting involving an older child who has not...
On July 31, 2024, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided the Monmouth County case of N.J. Division of Child Protection and Permanency v. A.P. The principal issue under N.J.S.A. 2C:52-1 concerned whether D.C.P. and P could use the defendant’s expunged records in their...
The Appellate Division concluded with the following in relevant part: The State of New Jersey Domestic Violence Procedures Manual issued under the authority of the Supreme Court and the Attorney General acknowledges courts are permitted to "proceed with the FRO...
The PDVA provides: If a criminal complaint arising out of the same incident which is the subject matter of a complaint brought under the PDVA has been filed, testimony given by the plaintiff or defendant in the domestic violence matter shall not be used in the...
On August 5, 2024, a three-judge appellate panel decided the Camden County case of T.B. v. I.W. The principal issue under N.J.S.A. 2C:25-29 concerned the adverse inference that the trial court drew against the defendant for not testifying at the Final Restraining...
The Supreme Court majority continued in relevant part: Subsection (c)(2) also ensures that liability is still imposed for impairing the avail ability or integrity of other things used in an official proceeding beyond the “record[s], document[s], or other object[s]”...
Chief Justice Roberts continued in relevant part: The Court considers both “the specific context” in which (c)(2) appears “and the broader context of the statute as a whole.” Robinson v. Shell Oil Co., 519 U. S. 337, 341. (1) Section 1512(c)(1) describes types of...