Fred Sisto | Criminal Attorney | Ocean and Monmouth County

Call Us Today
732-898-3232

  • Home
  • Criminal Defense Services
    ▼
    • Drug Crimes
      ▼
      • Drug Manufacturing
      • Intent to Distribute Narcotics
      • Prescription Drug Crimes
      • Leader of Narcotics Trafficking Network
    • Weapons Charges
      ▼
      • Prohibited Weapons and Devices
      • Manufacture, Transport, etc. of Weapons
      • Illegal Possession of a Gun
      • Possession of Weapons for Unlawful Purposes
    • Expungements
    • Theft Attorney
    • Violent Crimes
      ▼
      • Robbery/Burglary
      • Manslaughter
      • Extortion
      • Assault
      • Sexual Offenses
    • Arson
    • DUI / DWI
      ▼
      • Alcohol DUI
      • Drug DUI
      • Refusing a Breath Test
    • Driving with A Suspended License
    • Property Forfeiture
    • Anti-Drug Profiteering
    • Juvenile Delinquency
  • Español / Spanish Speaking Attorney
  • About
    ▼
    • Testimonials
    • Defending Cases In
      ▼
      • Monmouth County
      • Ocean County
  • Blog
  • Contact
    ▼
    • Receive a Call From Fred
  • DUI Checkpoint Alerts
  • Results
  • Payment Options
  • Home
  • Criminal Defense Services
    • Drug Crimes
      • Drug Manufacturing
      • Intent to Distribute Narcotics
      • Prescription Drug Crimes
      • Leader of Narcotics Trafficking Network
    • Weapons Charges
      • Prohibited Weapons and Devices
      • Manufacture, Transport, etc. of Weapons
      • Illegal Possession of a Gun
      • Possession of Weapons for Unlawful Purposes
    • Expungements
    • Theft Attorney
    • Violent Crimes
      • Robbery/Burglary
      • Manslaughter
      • Extortion
      • Assault
      • Sexual Offenses
    • Arson
    • DUI / DWI
      • Alcohol DUI
      • Drug DUI
      • Refusing a Breath Test
    • Driving with A Suspended License
    • Property Forfeiture
    • Anti-Drug Profiteering
    • Juvenile Delinquency
  • Español / Spanish Speaking Attorney
  • About
    • Testimonials
    • Defending Cases In
      • Monmouth County
      • Ocean County
  • Blog
  • Contact
    • Receive a Call From Fred
  • DUI Checkpoint Alerts
  • Results
  • Payment Options
Home >> Suppression of Exculpatory Evidence (Part 3)

May 14, 2021 by Fred Sisto

Suppression of Exculpatory Evidence (Part 3)

The video recording constituted extrinsic evidence that simultaneously contradicted Detective Domenech’s testimony that she canvassed the crime scene looking for witnesses and supported the family members’ testimony that they attempted to speak to the police. It was admissible under N.J.R.E. 607(a), which permits introduction of relevant extrinsic evidence “for the purpose of attacking or supporting the credibility of a witness.” The testimony of Detective Domenech and the family were in direct conflict. The on-scene video arguably resolved the conflict. The prosecutor dispelled any doubt about the relevance and importance of the withheld video when he urged the jury to reject the family members’ testimony about their attempted cooperation. If the jury accepted the prosecutor’s argument that the family members testified falsely about coming forward to the police, the jury was entitled to reject the entirety of their testimony, including their testimony that defendant acted in self-defense.

The video was admissible to rebut a charge of recent fabrication pursuant to N.J.R.E. 803(a). The combination of the detective’s testimony that no witnesses came forward at the scene and the prosecutor’s finely crafted questions posed to defendant’s family members — eliciting answers that they met with defense counsel and each other before testifying and that their bonds of affection toward defendant made them want to help him — inescapably suggested that they were fabricating their testimony or had an improper motive in testifying. The contemporaneously recorded video of the contact between the family members and the police at the scene rebutted the implied charge, raised by the prosecutor’s questions, of recent fabrication and improper motive.

In an unpublished opinion, a three-judge appellate panel sided with the prosecution. Those judges, Yannotti, Currier, and Firko, issued their decision in a “per curiam” opinion. “Per curiam” opinions are supposed to involve such a straightforward application of the law to the fact that there is no need for a judge to attach his or her individual name or analysis to it. Their decision was reversed by the unanimous New Jersey Supreme Court.

Filed Under: Blog, Criminal Law, Monmouth County, New Jersey, Ocean County

Testimonials

Fred is a stickler for detail and communicates with clients very, very well. He is smart and astute. I would recommend him unconditionally.

Tom O   

I would highly recommend Mr. Sisto. He is very insightful and proficient, yet still down to Earth. Fred is great at communicating and breaking down the facts. But most importantly, he excels at getting results.

Bill K   

Thanks to Fred I have no criminal record whatsoever.

Luke A   

Great!!! , got my case handled in the exact manner that I was told and would recommend to everyone else in need of legal representation.

Raumelis R   
See More Testimonials

Recent Posts

  • Drug Recognition Evidence (Part 3)
  • Drug Recognition Evidence (Part 2)
  • Drug Recognition Evidence (Part 1)
  • Shoplifting and Sales Tax (Part 2)
  • Shoplifting and Sales Tax (Part 1)
  • Handgun Permit-To-Carry Applications (Part 3)
  • Handgun Permit-To-Carry Applications (Part 2)
  • Handgun Permit-To-Carry Applications (Part 1)

Recent Speaking Engagement

Site Disclaimer

Attorney Referral Fees

Frederick P Sisto has earned Lawyer Legion's recognition for Community Leadership
 
Top Criminal Defense Attorney in Brick

Law Office of Frederick P. Sisto

Point Pleasant Office*:
302 Hawthorne Ave, Suite 1
Point Pleasant Beach, NJ 08742

Brick Township Office*:
223 Drum Point Road, Suite 1
Brick Township, NJ 08723

Sea Girt Office*:
2150 NJ-35,
Suite 225
Sea Girt, NJ 08750

Phone: 732-898-3232
Fax: 201-508-3393
*Office visits by appointment only.

Representing clients throughout all court jurisdictions of New Jersey.

WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE CRIMINAL TRIAL ATTORNEY CERTIFICATION, NO ASPECT OF THIS ADVERTISEMENT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY

en English
en Englishes Spanish