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.
7 New Jersey opinions name it 2 courts 1998–2025 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. Nelsongreen2 sentences2025"The Brady disclosure rule applies only to information of which the prosecution is actually or constructively aware." State v. Nelson, 155 N.J. 487, 498 (1998). 2021"The Brady disclosure rule applies only to information of which the prosecution is actually or constructively aware." Ibid. | 2 | 4 |
State v. Nelsongreen1 sentence2024Our Supreme Court has stated repeatedly that to qualify as newly discovered evidence entitling a party to a new trial, the new evidence must be (1) material to the issue and not merely cumulative or impeaching or contradictory; (2) discovered since the trial and not discoverable by reasonable diligence beforehand; and (3) of the sort that would probably change the jury's verdict if a new trial were granted. [Carter, 85 N.J. at 314 (citing State v. Artis, 36 N.J. 538, 541 (1962)).] "The Brady disclosure rule applies to information of which the prosecution is actually or constructively aware." S | 1 | 1 |
State v. Artisgreen1 sentence2024Our Supreme Court has stated repeatedly that to qualify as newly discovered evidence entitling a party to a new trial, the new evidence must be (1) material to the issue and not merely cumulative or impeaching or contradictory; (2) discovered since the trial and not discoverable by reasonable diligence beforehand; and (3) of the sort that would probably change the jury's verdict if a new trial were granted. [Carter, 85 N.J. at 314 (citing State v. Artis, 36 N.J. 538, 541 (1962)).] "The Brady disclosure rule applies to information of which the prosecution is actually or constructively aware." S | 1 | 1 |
Kyles v. Whitleygreen1 sentence2024Super. 206, 213 (App. Div. 2000). "[T]he individual prosecutor has a duty to learn of any favorable evidence known to the others acting on the government's behalf . . . ." Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419, 437 (1995). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Mustarogreen1 sentence2022Nelson, 155 N.J. at 497-500 ; see id. at 519 (Handler, J., concurring in part and A-3354-20 14 dissenting in part) (collecting cases); see also State v. Mustaro, 411 N.J. | 1 | 1 |
William L. Calley, Jr., Cross-Appellant v. Howard H. Callaway, Etc., Etc., Cross-Appelleesgreen2 sentences1998See, e.g., Calley v. Callaway, 519 F. 2d 184, 223 (5th Cir.1975) ( en banc ), cert. denied sub nom. 1998See, e.g., Calley v. Callaway, 519 F.2d 184, 228 (5th Cir.1975) (en banc), cert. denied sub nom. | 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. Carter
green
1 sentence2024Our Supreme Court has stated repeatedly that to qualify as newly discovered evidence entitling a party to a new trial, the new evidence must be (1) material to the issue and not merely cumulative or impeaching or contradictory; (2) discovered since the trial and not discoverable by reasonable diligence beforehand; and (3) of the sort that would probably change the jury's verdict if a new trial were granted. [Carter, 85 N.J. at 314 (citing State v. Artis, 36 N.J. 538, 541 (1962)).] "The Brady disclosure rule applies to information of which the prosecution is actually or constructively aware." S | 1 | 2024–2024 |
SBC Communications, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission
green
1 sentence2000Ibid. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
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.