10 New Jersey opinions name it 2 courts 1993–2023 1 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. MacOngreen2 sentences2020We concluded that the admission of CSAAS expert testimony "severely impaired the defense's ability to test the victim's credibility" and "was 'sufficient to raise a reasonable doubt as to whether the error led the jury to a result it otherwise might not have reached.'" Id. at 465 (quoting Macon, 57 N.J. at 336 ). 2020Super. at 465 (citing R. 2:10-2), and was "sufficient to raise a A-2435-16T2 21 reasonable doubt as to whether the error led the jury to a result it otherwise might not have reached." State v. Macon, 57 N.J. 325, 336 (1971). | 2 | 4 |
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.green1 sentence2023The third Daubert factor instructs the Court to consider “the known or potential rate of error” as well as the existence of standards governing the operation of the particular scientific technique. 509 U.S. at 594. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Crawleygreen1 sentence2019See State v. Knight, 183 N.J. 449, 470 (2005) ("[A] defendant who pleads guilty is prohibited from raising, on appeal, the contention that the State violated his constitutional rights prior to the plea.") (quoting State v. Crawley, 149 N.J. 310, 316 (1997)). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Knightgreen1 sentence2019See State v. Knight, 183 N.J. 449, 470 (2005) ("[A] defendant who pleads guilty is prohibited from raising, on appeal, the contention that the State violated his constitutional rights prior to the plea.") (quoting State v. Crawley, 149 N.J. 310, 316 (1997)). | 1 | 1 |
New Jersey Div. of Youth v. Klwgreen2 sentences2013See K.L.W., supra, 419 N.J. 2013See K.L.W., supra, 419 N.J. | 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. G.E.P.
green
2 sentences2020We concluded that the admission of CSAAS expert testimony "severely impaired the defense's ability to test the victim's credibility" and "was 'sufficient to raise a reasonable doubt as to whether the error led the jury to a result it otherwise might not have reached.'" Id. at 465 (quoting Macon, 57 N.J. at 336 ). 2020Thus, the CSAAS testimony here likely "severely impaired the defense's ability to test the victim's credibility" which was "clearly capable of producing an unjust result," see G.E.P., 458 N.J. | 2 | 2020–2020 |
Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts
green
2 sentences2014Id. at 324 , 129 S. Ct. at 2540 , 174 L. 2014Id. at 324 , 129 S. Ct. at 2540 , 174 L. | 2 | 2014–2014 |
State v. J.L.G.
green
1 sentence2020Unlike J.L.G., where the victim used her iPhone to record an episode of sexual abuse, 234 N.J. at 274 , here there was no objective evidence of defendant having sex with Jenny. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Williams
green
2 sentences1993When the Court reversed the death sentence in Williams II, it said that “the lack of significant information regarding jurors’ attitudes on a host of issues denied both parties the ability to challenge jurors for cause, and perhaps most importantly left the trial court unable to fairly evaluate the-fitness of many of the jurors to serve.” 113 N.J. at 408 , 550 A.2d 1172 (emphasis added). 1993When the Court reversed the death sentence in Williams II, it said that “the lack of significant information regarding jurors’ attitudes on a host of issues denied both parties the ability to challenge jurors for cause, and perhaps most importantly left the trial court unable to fairly evaluate the-fitness of many of the jurors to serve.” 113 N.J. at 408 , 550 A.2d 1172 (emphasis added). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
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.