9 New Jersey opinions name it 2 courts 1992–2025 4 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. Manngreen2 sentences2021A flight instruction should be given when an unexplained departure "reasonably justif[ies] an inference that it was done with a consciousness of guilt and pursuant to an effort to avoid an accusation based on that guilt." State v. Mann, 132 N.J. 410, 418-19 (1993) (quoting State v. Sullivan, 43 N.J. 209, 238-39 (1964)). 2021State v. Mann, 132 N.J. 410, 420 (1993). | 3 | 4 |
State v. Reddishgreen2 sentences2022Again, we disagree. "[A]ppropriate and proper [jury] charges are essential for a fair trial." State v. Baum, 224 N.J. 147, 159 (2016) (quoting State v. Reddish, 181 N.J. 553, 613 (2004)). 2020Finally, "[a]s an indication of the paramount importance of accurate jury instructions, we have held that erroneous instructions on material issues are presumed to be reversible error." [State v. Reddish, 181 N.J. 553, 613 (2004) (alteration in original) (citation omitted) (quoting State v. Marshall, 173 N.J. 343, 359 (2002) (Marshall IV)).] The judge's flight instruction mirrored the Model Charge, according it a presumption of correctness. | 2 | 2 |
State v. Longgreen1 sentence2025See State v. Long, 119 N.J. 439, 499 (1990). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Eugene C. Baum(073056)green1 sentence2022Again, we disagree. "[A]ppropriate and proper [jury] charges are essential for a fair trial." State v. Baum, 224 N.J. 147, 159 (2016) (quoting State v. Reddish, 181 N.J. 553, 613 (2004)). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Sullivangreen1 sentence2021A flight instruction should be given when an unexplained departure "reasonably justif[ies] an inference that it was done with a consciousness of guilt and pursuant to an effort to avoid an accusation based on that guilt." State v. Mann, 132 N.J. 410, 418-19 (1993) (quoting State v. Sullivan, 43 N.J. 209, 238-39 (1964)). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Larry Allen Myersgreen1 sentence2021The probative value of evidence related to flight depends upon the degree of confident with which four inferences can be drawn: (1) from the defendant's behavior to flight; (2) from flight to consciousness of guilt; (3) from consciousness of guilt to consciousness of guilt concerning the crime charged; and (4) from consciousness of guilt concerning the crime charge to actual guilt of the crime charged. [Id. at 420 (quoting United States v. Myers, 550 F.2d 1036, 1049 (1977).] Here, defense counsel objected to the flight charge. | 1 | 1 |
Mogull v. CB Commercial Real Estate Group, Inc.green1 sentence2020See State v. R.B., 183 N.J. 308, 325 (2005) (stating A-5387-17T4 21 trial court's obligation to deliver model charges); Mogull v. CB Comm. Real Estate Grp., Inc., 162 N.J. 449, 466 (2000) (noting "[i]t is difficult to find that a charge that follows the Model Charge so closely constitutes plain error"). | 1 | 1 |
State v. RBgreen1 sentence2020See State v. R.B., 183 N.J. 308, 325 (2005) (stating A-5387-17T4 21 trial court's obligation to deliver model charges); Mogull v. CB Comm. Real Estate Grp., Inc., 162 N.J. 449, 466 (2000) (noting "[i]t is difficult to find that a charge that follows the Model Charge so closely constitutes plain error"). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Latneygreen2 sentences2020A flight instruction "is appropriate when there are 'circumstances present and unexplained which . . . reasonably justify an inference that it was done with a consciousness of guilt and pursuant to an effort to avoid an accusation based on that guilt.'" State v. Latney, 415 N.J. 2020Latney, 415 N.J. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Marshallgreen1 sentence2020Finally, "[a]s an indication of the paramount importance of accurate jury instructions, we have held that erroneous instructions on material issues are presumed to be reversible error." [State v. Reddish, 181 N.J. 553, 613 (2004) (alteration in original) (citation omitted) (quoting State v. Marshall, 173 N.J. 343, 359 (2002) (Marshall IV)).] The judge's flight instruction mirrored the Model Charge, according it a presumption of correctness. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Wilsongreen1 sentence2018The State argues that a flight instruction is appropriate when there are both plausible and sinister explanations for a defendant's flight, citing State v. Wilson, 57 N.J. 39, 48-49 (1970). | 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. Melendez
green
1 sentence1992The majority concludes, ante at 59, 609 A. 2d at 6 , that Fortuna's flight combined with the flight instruction cannot be characterized as evidence "against" Melendez for Confrontation Clause purposes because the trial court gave a limiting instruction. | 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.