Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
21 New Jersey opinions name it 2 courts 1911–2025 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Crisafigreen2 sentences2004Additionally, we instructed that courts “should inform the defendants that they must conduct their defense in accordance with the relevant rules of criminal procedure and evidence, that a lack of knowledge of law may impair their ability to defend themselves, and that their dual role as attorney and accused might hamper the effectiveness of their defense.” Id. at 512 , 608 A.2d 317 . 2004Additionally, we instructed that courts “should inform the defendants that they must conduct their defense in accordance with the relevant rules of criminal procedure and evidence, that a lack of knowledge of law may impair their ability to defend themselves, and that their dual role as attorney and accused might hamper the effectiveness of their defense.” Id. at 512 , 608 A.2d 317 . | 2 | 8 |
Joseph D. McMAHON P-7814, Appellant, v. Thomas FULCOMER, Superintendentgreen2 sentences1992McMahon v. Fulcomer, 821 F.2d 934, 945 (3d Cir.1987); Welty, supra, 674 F. 2d at 188 . 1989Accord McMahon v. Fulcomer, 821 F. 2d 934, 945 (3d Cir.1987). | 2 | 2 |
Michigan v. Tuckergreen2 sentences1976See Michigan v. Tucker, 417 U. S. 433 , 94 S. Ct. 2357 , 41 L. 1976See Michigan v. Tucker, 417 U. S. 433 , 94 S. Ct. 2357 , 41 L. | 2 | 2 |
State v. Dispotogreen2 sentences2021Such determinations are better suited to fact-based assessments rather than being made subject to bright-line pronouncements. [ 189 N.J. at 124-25 .] A-1339-18 10 Defendant argues the trial judge failed to consider the totality of the circumstances including: "whether the more[-]than[-]four-hour interval between the first and second parts of the custodial interrogation affected the twenty-one[-]year[-]old defendant's understanding of the seriousness of the situation, rendering him unable to appreciate his waiver . . . ."; the periods during which defendant was isolated in the interview room; t 2020State v. Dispoto, 189 N.J. 108, 124-25 (2007). | 1 | 2 |
Strickland v. Washingtongreen2 sentences2016In cases brought against a parent by the Division, the effectiveness of defense counsel is assessed by the two-part test set forth in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 , 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2064 , 80 L. 2016In cases brought against a parent by the Division, the effectiveness of defense counsel is assessed by the two-part test set forth in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 , 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2064 , 80 L. | 1 | 2 |
United States v. Welty, John Jacobgreen2 sentences1992McMahon v. Fulcomer, 821 F.2d 934, 945 (3d Cir.1987); Welty, supra, 674 F. 2d at 188 . 1989In United States v. Welty, 674 F. 2d 185, 188 (3d Cir.1982), the court noted: The district court judge should tell the defendant, for example, that he will have to conduct his defense in accordance with the Federal Rules of Evidence and Criminal Procedure, rules with which he may not be familiar; that the defendant may be hampered in presenting his best defense by his lack of knowledge of the law; and that the effectiveness of his defense may well be diminished by his dual role as attorney and accused. [Emphasis supplied]. | 1 | 2 |
State v. Rosegreen1 sentence2025Also, the court should explain to the defendants the difficulties in acting as their own counsel and should specifically advise the defendants A-3500-22 21 that it would be unwise not to accept the assistance of counsel. [ 128 N.J. at 511-12 (citations omitted).] Although the Crisafi Court found the trial court did not "engage[] in the necessary colloquy," id. at 512 , the Court determined the record demonstrated the defendant's knowing waiver of the right to counsel and his appreciation of the nature of his request to represent himself and had "sought to manipulate the system by wavering betw | 1 | 1 |
State v. McCombsgreen1 sentence2025Also, the court should explain to the defendants the difficulties in acting as their own counsel and should specifically advise the defendants A-3500-22 21 that it would be unwise not to accept the assistance of counsel. [ 128 N.J. at 511-12 (citations omitted).] Although the Crisafi Court found the trial court did not "engage[] in the necessary colloquy," id. at 512 , the Court determined the record demonstrated the defendant's knowing waiver of the right to counsel and his appreciation of the nature of his request to represent himself and had "sought to manipulate the system by wavering betw | 1 | 1 |
State v. Ortisigreen1 sentence2018The inquiry must explore with a defendant: (1) dangers and disadvantages of self-representation; (2) nature of the charges against him, the statutory defenses to those charges, and the possible range of punishment; (3) technical problems he may encounter in acting as his own counsel and of the risks he takes if the defense is unsuccessful; (4) necessity that he conduct his defense in accordance with the relevant rules of criminal procedure and evidence, that a lack of knowledge of the law may impair his ability to defend himself, and that his dual role as attorney and accused might hamper the | 1 | 1 |
State v. Brunsongreen2 sentences1999Commentators generally agree that the use of prior-conviction evidence is fraught with a high risk of prejudice, and they express skepticism about the effectiveness of an instruction to the jury to limit its use of the evidence to an assessment of defendant’s credibility. [Id. at 385, 625 A.2d 1085 .] “ ‘The theory of ‘limited use’ under which such explosive evidence is put before the jury fails to correspond to the actual effect of the evidence even in the minds of the most sober and conscientious jurors.’ ” Id. at 386 , 625 A.2d 1085 (quoting H. 1999Commentators generally agree that the use of prior-conviction evidence is fraught with a high risk of prejudice, and they express skepticism about the effectiveness of an instruction to the jury to limit its use of the evidence to an assessment of defendant’s credibility. [Id. at 385, 625 A.2d 1085 .] “ ‘The theory of ‘limited use’ under which such explosive evidence is put before the jury fails to correspond to the actual effect of the evidence even in the minds of the most sober and conscientious jurors.’ ” Id. at 386 , 625 A.2d 1085 (quoting H. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Boiardogreen1 sentence1984Cf. State v. Boiardo, 82 N.J. 446, 467 (1980). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Molnargreen1 sentence1982State v. Molnar, 81 N.J. 475, 484 (1980). | 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. O'NEILL
green
2 sentences2009We held “that when Miranda warnings are given after a custodial interrogation has already produced incriminating statements, the admissibility of post-warning statements will turn on whether the warnings functioned effectively in providing the defendant the ability to exercise his state law privilege against self-incrimination.” Id. at 180-81 , 936 A.2d 438 . 2009We concluded that when pre-custodial warnings have been given to a defendant as part of a continuing pattern of interactions between the defendant and the police, and during that continuing sequence of events nothing of an intervening nature occurs that would dilute the effectiveness of the warning that had been given, then there would appear to be no need to require that another warning be given. [Ibid.] In O’Neill , we applied the totality-of-the-circumstances approach to the ‘“question-first, warn-later’ interrogation procedure,” in which the police first question a suspect in custody witho | 1 | 2009–2009 |
State v. Fritz
green
2 sentences1996Counsel's performance must be analyzed under the standards set forth in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed. 2d 674 (1984), adopted by our Supreme Court in State v. Fritz, 105 N.J. 42 , 519 A. 2d 336 (1987). 1996Counsel's performance must be analyzed under the standards set forth in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed. 2d 674 (1984), adopted by our Supreme Court in State v. Fritz, 105 N.J. 42 , 519 A. 2d 336 (1987). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
State v. Graham
green
1 sentence1976See Michigan v. Tucker, 417 U.S. 433 , 94 S.Ct. 2357 , 41 L.Ed. 2d 182 (1974); State v. Graham, 59 N.J. 366 (1971). | 1 | 1976–1976 |
Dutton v. Warschauer
green
1 sentence1911As Chief-Justice Field of California says, in the well-considered ease of Dutton v. Warschauer, 21 Cal. 609 , in discussing the subject: “It is not easy to give to the fact of possession any influence as notice without making it notice of all such matters as a prudent man, desirous of purchasing tbe property, would naturally inquire about respecting the title. | 1 | 1911–1911 |
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.