12 New Jersey opinions name it 2 courts 2015–2026 8 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. Crisoforo Montalvo (077331) (Monmouth and Statewide)green2 sentences2025Further, when, as here, "a party does not object to a jury instruction, [appellate courts] review[] the instruction for plain error." State v. Montalvo, 229 N.J. 300, 320 (2017) (citing R. 1:7-2). 2025A-3324-21 32 "When a party does not object to a jury instruction, [we] review[] the instruction for plain error." State v. Montalvo, 229 N.J. 300, 320 (2017) (citing R. 1:7-2; State v. Wakefield, 190 N.J. 397, 472-73 (2007)). | 6 | 6 |
State v. Jimenezgreen2 sentences2025A-3324-21 32 "When a party does not object to a jury instruction, [we] review[] the instruction for plain error." State v. Montalvo, 229 N.J. 300, 320 (2017) (citing R. 1:7-2; State v. Wakefield, 190 N.J. 397, 472-73 (2007)). 2024As is the case here, "[w]hen a party does not object to a jury instruction, this [c]ourt reviews the instruction for plain error." State v. Montalvo, 229 N.J. 300, 320 (2017) (citing R. 1:7-2; State v. Wakefield, 190 N.J. 397, 472-73 (2007)). | 3 | 3 |
State v. MacOngreen2 sentences2025An unjust result arises when the error raises a "reasonable doubt as to whether the error led the jury to a result it otherwise might not have reached." Taffaro, 195 N.J. at 454 (quoting State v. Macon, 57 N.J. 325, 336 (1971)). 2021An unjust result arises when the error "raise[s] a reasonable doubt as to whether the error led the A-2203-18 55 jury to a result it otherwise might not have reached." State v. Macon, 57 N.J. 325, 336 (1971); see also State v. Taffaro, 195 N.J. 442, 454 (2008). | 3 | 3 |
State v. Jamil McKinney(073070)green2 sentences2025Because the defense did not object to the jury charge, we review the instruction for plain error and only reverse if that error was "clearly capable of producing an unjust result." State v. McKinney, 223 N.J. 475, 494 (2015) (quoting R. 2:10-2). 2021Absent objection, we review the instruction for plain error and only reverse if that error was "clearly capable of producing an unjust result." State v. McKinney, 223 N.J. 475, 494 (2015) (quoting R. 2:10-2). | 3 | 3 |
State v. Taffarogreen2 sentences2025An unjust result arises when the error raises a "reasonable doubt as to whether the error led the jury to a result it otherwise might not have reached." Taffaro, 195 N.J. at 454 (quoting State v. Macon, 57 N.J. 325, 336 (1971)). 2021An unjust result arises when the error "raise[s] a reasonable doubt as to whether the error led the A-2203-18 55 jury to a result it otherwise might not have reached." State v. Macon, 57 N.J. 325, 336 (1971); see also State v. Taffaro, 195 N.J. 442, 454 (2008). | 2 | 3 |
State v. Chaplandgreen2 sentences2025The party challenging the instruction must demonstrate "legal impropriety in the charge prejudicially affecting the substantial rights of the defendant and sufficiently grievous to justify notice by the reviewing court and to convince the court that of itself the error possessed a clear capacity to bring about an unjust result." Id. at 321 (quoting State v. Chapland, 187 N.J. 275, 289 (2006)). 2024More particularly, [r]egarding a jury instruction, "plain error requires demonstration of 'legal impropriety in the charge prejudicially affecting the substantial rights of the defendant and sufficiently grievous to justify notice by the reviewing court and to convince the court that of itself the error possessed a clear capacity to bring about an unjust result.'" [Id. at 321 (quoting State v. Chapland, 187 N.J. 275, 289 (2006)).] A-1652-21 15 "The error must be evaluated 'in light of the overall strength of the State's case.'" State v. Sanchez-Medina, 231 N.J. 452, 468 (2018) (quoting State v | 2 | 2 |
State v. Fausto Camacho (072525)green2 sentences2021A-1672-19 14 "In the context of jury instructions, plain error is '[l]egal impropriety in the charge prejudicially affecting the substantial rights of the defendant and sufficiently grievous to justify notice by the reviewing court and to convince the court that of itself the error possessed a clear capacity to bring about an unjust result.'" State v. Camacho, 218 N.J. 533, 554 (2014) (alteration in original) (quoting State v. Adams, 194 N.J. 186, 207 (2008)). 2015State v. Camacho, 218 N.J. 533, 554 , 95 A.3d 635 (2014). | 1 | 2 |
State v. Galiciagreen1 sentence2024More particularly, [r]egarding a jury instruction, "plain error requires demonstration of 'legal impropriety in the charge prejudicially affecting the substantial rights of the defendant and sufficiently grievous to justify notice by the reviewing court and to convince the court that of itself the error possessed a clear capacity to bring about an unjust result.'" [Id. at 321 (quoting State v. Chapland, 187 N.J. 275, 289 (2006)).] A-1652-21 15 "The error must be evaluated 'in light of the overall strength of the State's case.'" State v. Sanchez-Medina, 231 N.J. 452, 468 (2018) (quoting State v | 1 | 1 |
State v. Sanchez-Medinagreen1 sentence2024More particularly, [r]egarding a jury instruction, "plain error requires demonstration of 'legal impropriety in the charge prejudicially affecting the substantial rights of the defendant and sufficiently grievous to justify notice by the reviewing court and to convince the court that of itself the error possessed a clear capacity to bring about an unjust result.'" [Id. at 321 (quoting State v. Chapland, 187 N.J. 275, 289 (2006)).] A-1652-21 15 "The error must be evaluated 'in light of the overall strength of the State's case.'" State v. Sanchez-Medina, 231 N.J. 452, 468 (2018) (quoting State v | 1 | 1 |
State v. Anthony K. Cole (076255) (Middlesex and Statewide)green1 sentence2022See State v. Cole, 229 N.J. 430, 455 (2017). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Adamsgreen1 sentence2021A-1672-19 14 "In the context of jury instructions, plain error is '[l]egal impropriety in the charge prejudicially affecting the substantial rights of the defendant and sufficiently grievous to justify notice by the reviewing court and to convince the court that of itself the error possessed a clear capacity to bring about an unjust result.'" State v. Camacho, 218 N.J. 533, 554 (2014) (alteration in original) (quoting State v. Adams, 194 N.J. 186, 207 (2008)). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Munafogreen1 sentence2020"Because defendant did not object to [this] jury charge, we review the instruction for plain error." State v. Munafo, 222 N.J. 480, 488 (2015). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Jenkinsgreen1 sentence2020Even if there is no request by a party to charge the jury on a lesser - included offense, a trial court has an independent, non-delegable duty to instruct a jury on such a charge "when the facts adduced at trial clearly indicate that a jury could convict on the lesser while acquitting on the greater offense." State v. Jenkins, 178 N.J. 347, 361 (2004) (citations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Jersey. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
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.