The Court continued in relevant part: As for the first prong, defendant initially was charged with: (i) four counts of second degree sexual assault on a minor in violation of N.J.S.A. 2C:14-2(b), each a crime in the second degree; (ii) one count of child endangerment...
The Morris County Law Division continued in relevant part: Nevertheless, assuming arguendo that one can equate the constitutionality of involuntary education with involuntary medication, this court rejects that Sell permits the appointment of a Guardian / Guardian Ad...
On March 15, 2023, Judge Franzblau of the Morris County Superior Court decided the case of State v. J.D. The principal issue before the Court under N.J.S.A. 2C:4-4 concerned whether the State could appoint a guardian to assist the defendant in attaining competence to...
Chief Justice Rabner concluded with the following in relevant part: Although the Court cautions against it, if prosecutors or investigators show witnesses the same or new photos of a defendant during trial preparation, under the belief there is good reason to do so,...
The New Jersey Supreme Court continued in relevant part: Against the background of Henderson and persuasive case law, the Court finds no reason to treat impermissibly suggestive identification events during pretrial preparation differently than other identification...
Chief Justice Rabner continued in relevant part: Multiple viewings of mugshots “can create a risk of ‘mugshot exposure’ and ‘mugshot commitment.’” Mugshot exposure occurs “when a witness initially views a set of photos and makes no identification, but then selects...
The Court continued in relevant part: Finding no reason to treat impermissibly suggestive events during trial preparation differently from other suggestive identification procedures, the Court extends the relevant principles in Henderson to trial preparation sessions....
On January 8, 2024, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided the Burlington County case of State v. Brandon Washington. The principal issue before the Court concerned the rules concerning eyewitness identification procedures as they relate to trial preparation. Chief...
The Appellate Division concluded with the following in relevant part: Read in context, it is clear that Bruen's focus on the Nation's early history of firearm regulation pertains to the substantive criteria used by licensing regimes to deny applications, not to...
The Appellate Division continued in relevant part: We deem it noteworthy that Bruen endorsed the concept of shall-issue licensing regimes without citing any historical analogues. The Court, in other words, acknowledged the constitutionality of modern licensing systems...