23 New Jersey opinions name it 3 courts 1992–2026 7 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New Jersey courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Rose v. Clarkgreen2 sentences2026Structural error review is 15 reserved for errors -- such as the complete denial of counsel -- that “necessarily render a trial fundamentally unfair.” Ibid. (quoting Rose v. Clark, 478 U.S. 570, 577 (1986)). 2005See Rose v. Clark, 478 U.S. 570, 585 , 106 S.Ct. 3101, 3110 , 92 L.Ed.2d 460, 475 (1986) (Stevens, J., concurring) (stating Supreme Court did not question “the view that constitutional error is always sufficiently serious to create a presumption in favor of reversal” when it established harmless error standard for constitutional violations). | 3 | 3 |
State v. Fausto Camacho (072525)green2 sentences2020"A structural error . . . is a 'structural defect[] in the constitution of the trial mechanism, which def[ies] A-4142-17T4 17 analysis by harmless-error standards.'" State v. Camacho, 218 N.J. 533, 549 (2014) (second and third alterations in the original) (quoting Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. 279, 309-10 (1991)). 2020"A structural error . . . is a 'structural defect[] in the constitution of the trial mechanism, which def[ies] A-4142-17T4 17 analysis by harmless-error standards.'" State v. Camacho, 218 N.J. 533, 549 (2014) (second and third alterations in the original) (quoting Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. 279, 309-10 (1991)). | 3 | 3 |
Arizona v. Fulminantegreen2 sentences2020"A structural error . . . is a 'structural defect[] in the constitution of the trial mechanism, which def[ies] A-4142-17T4 17 analysis by harmless-error standards.'" State v. Camacho, 218 N.J. 533, 549 (2014) (second and third alterations in the original) (quoting Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. 279, 309-10 (1991)). 2020"A structural error . . . is a 'structural defect[] in the constitution of the trial mechanism, which def[ies] A-4142-17T4 17 analysis by harmless-error standards.'" State v. Camacho, 218 N.J. 533, 549 (2014) (second and third alterations in the original) (quoting Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. 279, 309-10 (1991)). | 2 | 4 |
Johnson v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2026Structural error review is 15 reserved for errors -- such as the complete denial of counsel -- that “necessarily render a trial fundamentally unfair.” Ibid. (quoting Rose v. Clark, 478 U.S. 570, 577 (1986)). 1999A structural error has also been defined as a “defect affecting the framework within which the trial proceeds, rather than simply an error in the trial process itself.” Johnson v. United States, 520 U.S. 461, 468 , 117 S.Ct. 1544, 1549, 137 L.Ed.2d 718, 728 (1997). | 2 | 3 |
State v. Purnellgreen2 sentences2015Accordingly, such "a structural error affects the legitimacy of the entire trial . . . ."4 State v. Purnell, 161 N.J. 44, 61 (1999). 2014It “affect[s] the framework within which the trial proceeds, rather than simply an error in the trial process itself.” Id. at 310 , 111 S.Ct. at 1265 , 113 L.Ed.2d at 331 ; see also State v. Purnell, 161 N.J. 44, 61 , 735 A.2d 513 (1999) (recognizing that “a structural error affects the legitimacy of the entire trial, rather than an isolated error that occurs during a certain part of the trial process and does not contaminate the trial as a whole”). | 2 | 3 |
State v. Jonesgreen2 sentences2024In State v. Jones, the Court explained a deprivation of the right to allocution pursuant to Rule 3:21-4(b) is a structural error, requiring remand. 232 N.J. 308, 318-19 (2018). 2023In State v. Jones, the Court explained a deprivation of the right to allocution pursuant to Rule 3:21-4(b) is a structural error, requiring remand. 232 N.J. 308, 318-19 (2018). | 2 | 2 |
Neder v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2020Structural errors "are so intrinsically harmful as to require automatic reversal . . . without regard to their effect on the outcome." Ibid. (quoting Neder v. United States, 527 U.S. 1, 7 (1999)) (alteration in original). 2020Structural errors "are so intrinsically harmful as to require automatic reversal . . . without regard to their effect on the outcome." Ibid. (quoting Neder v. United States, 527 U.S. 1, 7 (1999)) (alteration in original). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Kinggreen2 sentences2017See King, supra, 210 N.J. at 22 , 40 A.3d 41 (citing McKaskle v. Wiggins, 465 U.S. 168 , 177 n.8, 104 S.Ct. 944 , 950 n.8, 79 L.Ed.2.d 122, 133 n.8 (1984)). 2017See King, supra, 210 N.J. at 22 , 40 A.3d 41 (citing McKaskle v. Wiggins, 465 U.S. 168 , 177 n.8, 104 S.Ct. 944 , 950 n.8, 79 L.Ed.2.d 122, 133 n.8 (1984)). | 2 | 2 |
McKaskle v. Wigginsgreen2 sentences2017See King, supra, 210 N.J. at 22 , 40 A.3d 41 (citing McKaskle v. Wiggins, 465 U.S. 168 , 177 n.8, 104 S.Ct. 944 , 950 n.8, 79 L.Ed.2.d 122, 133 n.8 (1984)). 2017See King, supra, 210 N.J. at 22 , 40 A.3d 41 (citing McKaskle v. Wiggins, 465 U.S. 168 , 177 n.8, 104 S.Ct. 944 , 950 n.8, 79 L.Ed.2.d 122, 133 n.8 (1984)). | 2 | 2 |
United States v. Gonzalez-Lopezgreen2 sentences2020Super. at 44 (quoting Gonzalez-Lopez, 548 U.S. at 150 ). 2020United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez, 548 U.S. 140, 150, 152 (2006) (holding erroneous deprivation of counsel of choice is a structural error not subject to harmless-error analysis, and affirming judgment reversing defendant's conviction and remanding for new trial); State v. Kates, 216 N.J. 393, 397 (2014) (explaining that summary denial of defendant's request for an adjournment to obtain counsel of choice amounts to structural error and requires a new trial). | 1 | 2 |
State v. Figueroagreen1 sentence2022In State v. Figueroa, the trial court denied defendant's motion to represent himself after holding a hearing to determine if he was waiving his right to counsel knowingly and voluntarily. 186 N.J. 589, 592, 596 (2006). | 1 | 1 |
Sullivan v. Louisianagreen1 sentence2021See Sullivan v. Louisiana, 508 U.S. 275, 281-82 (1993) (holding that a “misdescription of the burden of proof” is a structural error that “vitiates all the jury’s findings”); State v. Harvey, 159 N.J. 277, 291 (1999) (noting that burden-of-proof errors “affect the procedural fairness of the trial” (quoting State v. Martini, 139 N.J. 3, 26 (1994))). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Harveygreen1 sentence2021See Sullivan v. Louisiana, 508 U.S. 275, 281-82 (1993) (holding that a “misdescription of the burden of proof” is a structural error that “vitiates all the jury’s findings”); State v. Harvey, 159 N.J. 277, 291 (1999) (noting that burden-of-proof errors “affect the procedural fairness of the trial” (quoting State v. Martini, 139 N.J. 3, 26 (1994))). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Martinigreen1 sentence2021See Sullivan v. Louisiana, 508 U.S. 275, 281-82 (1993) (holding that a “misdescription of the burden of proof” is a structural error that “vitiates all the jury’s findings”); State v. Harvey, 159 N.J. 277, 291 (1999) (noting that burden-of-proof errors “affect the procedural fairness of the trial” (quoting State v. Martini, 139 N.J. 3, 26 (1994))). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Raymond D. Kates (070971)green1 sentence2020United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez, 548 U.S. 140, 150, 152 (2006) (holding erroneous deprivation of counsel of choice is a structural error not subject to harmless-error analysis, and affirming judgment reversing defendant's conviction and remanding for new trial); State v. Kates, 216 N.J. 393, 397 (2014) (explaining that summary denial of defendant's request for an adjournment to obtain counsel of choice amounts to structural error and requires a new trial). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Jersey. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Children's Seashore House for Invalid Children v. Atlantic City
green
1 sentence2022In Children’s Seashore House, the court viewed the first part of the analysis as a structural test, where the court considered whether the structure “which is built; [is it] a fabric or edifice constructed, as a house, a church.” 68 N.J.L. at 389 . | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Rose
green
2 sentences2022A "court's failure to address defendant's request [to proceed pro se] is a structural error t hat entitles defendant to a new trial." Id. at 638 ; see also Outland, 245 N.J. at 507 A-0874-19 25 ("When a defendant's right of self-representation is violated, reversal of the defendant's conviction is warranted."). 2022On defendant's appeal from a denial of post-conviction relief, we remanded for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether defendant waived his right to self-representation and concluded that if defendant did not waive that A-0874-19 26 right "the court's failure to address defendant's request is a structural error that entitles defendant to a new trial." Id. at 638 . | 1 | 2022–2022 |
McCoy v. Louisiana
green
1 sentence2021Id. at 1510-11 . | 1 | 2021–2021 |
State v. Storm
green
1 sentence2020Significantly, in a case in which we held that a defendant's municipal court conviction was void ab initio because he was prosecuted by a private attorney who had not complied with Supreme Court requirements established in State v. Storm, 141 N.J. 245 (1995), we reversed and remanded for a new trial. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Kates
green
1 sentence2020Deprivation of counsel A-3096-17T1 17 of choice is considered a structural error not subject to harmless error analysis because the consequences of deprivation are "necessarily unquantifiable and indeterminate." Kates, 426 N.J. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Robinson v. Cahill
green
2 sentences2011The drafters of the New Jersey Constitution made the provision of a public education a "fundamental right." See Robinson IV, supra, 69 N.J. at 147, 351 A. 2d 713 . 2011The drafters of the New Jersey Constitution made the provision of a public education a “fundamental right.” See Robinson IV, supra, 69 N.J. at 147 , 351 A.2d 713 . | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Elizabeth Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Howell
green
2 sentences1996Sav. & Loan Ass’n v. Howell, 30 N.J. 190, 194 , 152 A.2d 359 (1959), we deem it far too nebulous and broad a concept to provide a structural framework for the exercise of an agency’s waiver power. 1996Sav. & Loan Ass’n v. Howell, 30 N.J. 190, 194 , 152 A.2d 359 (1959), we deem it far too nebulous and broad a concept to provide a structural framework for the exercise of an agency’s waiver power. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Taylor v. Louisiana
green
2 sentences1992Although "Taylor was not a member of the [injured] class * * * there is no rule that claims such as Taylor presents may be made only by those defendants who are members of the [injured class]." 419 U.S. at 526 , 95 S.Ct. at 695 , 42 L.Ed. 2d at 695 . *209 Defendant surely has a right to raise a structural challenge to the constitutional fairness of the New Jersey Capital Punishment Act. 1992Although "Taylor was not a member of the [injured] class * * * there is no rule that claims such as Taylor presents may be made only by those defendants who are members of the [injured class]." 419 U.S. at 526 , 95 S.Ct. at 695 , 42 L.Ed. 2d at 695 . *209 Defendant surely has a right to raise a structural challenge to the constitutional fairness of the New Jersey Capital Punishment Act. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.