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 1992–2025 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. Rhettgreen2 sentences2025Our Supreme Court has "consistently held that incorrect charges on substantive elements of a crime constitute reversible error." State v. Rhett, 127 N.J. 3, 7 (1992); see also State v. Grunow, 102 N.J. 133, 148 (1986) ("We have always placed an extraordinarily high value on the importance of appropriate and proper jury charges to the right to trial by jury. 2018See State v. Koskovich, 168 N.J. 448, 508 (2001) (stating the Court has "consistently held that incorrect charges on substantive elements of a crime constitute reversible error" (quoting State v. Rhett, 127 N.J. 3, 7 (1992))). | 3 | 6 |
State v. Martingreen2 sentences2003That is why "[w]e have consistently held that incorrect charges on substantive elements of a crime constitute reversible error." State v. Rhett, 127 N.J. 3, 7 , 601 A. 2d 689 (1992); State v. Martin, 119 N.J. 2, 15 , 573 A. 2d 1359 (1990)("So critical is the need for accuracy that erroneous instructions on material points are presumed to be reversible error."); State v. Vick, 117 N.J. 288, 289 , 566 A. 2d 531 (1989) (Erroneous jury instructions on elements of a crime "are almost invariably regarded as prejudicial."). 2003That is why "[w]e have consistently held that incorrect charges on substantive elements of a crime constitute reversible error." State v. Rhett, 127 N.J. 3, 7 , 601 A. 2d 689 (1992); State v. Martin, 119 N.J. 2, 15 , 573 A. 2d 1359 (1990)("So critical is the need for accuracy that erroneous instructions on material points are presumed to be reversible error."); State v. Vick, 117 N.J. 288, 289 , 566 A. 2d 531 (1989) (Erroneous jury instructions on elements of a crime "are almost invariably regarded as prejudicial."). | 2 | 3 |
State v. Grunowgreen2 sentences2025Our Supreme Court has "consistently held that incorrect charges on substantive elements of a crime constitute reversible error." State v. Rhett, 127 N.J. 3, 7 (1992); see also State v. Grunow, 102 N.J. 133, 148 (1986) ("We have always placed an extraordinarily high value on the importance of appropriate and proper jury charges to the right to trial by jury. 2001Because of the importance of jury instructions, “[w]e have consistently held that incorrect charges on substantive elements of a crime constitute reversible error.” State v. Rhett, 127 N.J. 3, 7 , 601 A.2d 689 (1992); State v. Martin, supra, 119 N.J. at 15 , 573 A.2d 1359 (“So critical is the need for accuracy that erroneous instructions on material points are presumed to be reversible error.”); State v. Grunow, 102 N.J. 133, 148 , 506 A.2d 708 (1986) (“Erroneous instructions on matters or issues material to the jurors’ deliberations are presumed to be reversible error.”). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Koskovichgreen1 sentence2018See State v. Koskovich, 168 N.J. 448, 508 (2001) (stating the Court has "consistently held that incorrect charges on substantive elements of a crime constitute reversible error" (quoting State v. Rhett, 127 N.J. 3, 7 (1992))). | 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. Vick
green
2 sentences2003That is why "[w]e have consistently held that incorrect charges on substantive elements of a crime constitute reversible error." State v. Rhett, 127 N.J. 3, 7 , 601 A. 2d 689 (1992); State v. Martin, 119 N.J. 2, 15 , 573 A. 2d 1359 (1990)("So critical is the need for accuracy that erroneous instructions on material points are presumed to be reversible error."); State v. Vick, 117 N.J. 288, 289 , 566 A. 2d 531 (1989) (Erroneous jury instructions on elements of a crime "are almost invariably regarded as prejudicial."). 2003That is why "[w]e have consistently held that incorrect charges on substantive elements of a crime constitute reversible error." State v. Rhett, 127 N.J. 3, 7 , 601 A. 2d 689 (1992); State v. Martin, 119 N.J. 2, 15 , 573 A. 2d 1359 (1990)("So critical is the need for accuracy that erroneous instructions on material points are presumed to be reversible error."); State v. Vick, 117 N.J. 288, 289 , 566 A. 2d 531 (1989) (Erroneous jury instructions on elements of a crime "are almost invariably regarded as prejudicial."). | 1 | 2003–2003 |
State v. Muhammad
green
2 sentences2001Further, in State v. Muhammad, supra, 145 N.J. at 51-52 , 678 A.2d 164 , we recognized that instructions in capital cases are more complex than in non-capital cases, and highlighted the importance of limiting instructions concerning victim-impact evidence. 2001Further, in State v. Muhammad, supra, 145 N.J. at 51-52 , 678 A.2d 164 , we recognized that instructions in capital cases are more complex than in non-capital cases, and highlighted the importance of limiting instructions concerning victim-impact evidence. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
State v. Sette
green
2 sentences1997Because of the significant risk that the jury could have misunderstood the requisite level of intent necessary for a conviction on attempted murder, we must reverse that conviction and remand for a new trial. [State v. Rhett, supra, 127 N.J. at 7-8 , 601 A.2d 689 (citations omitted) (emphasis added).] Similarly, in State v. Sette, 259 N.J.Super. 156, 189 , 611 A.2d 1129 (App.Div.1992), when charging the jury on the state of mind required to convict defendant of attempted murder, the judge directed the jury “they must find that defendant, “when he stabbed [the victim], did so purposely or knowi 1997Because of the significant risk that the jury could have misunderstood the requisite level of intent necessary for a conviction on attempted murder, we must reverse that conviction and remand for a new trial. [State v. Rhett, supra, 127 N.J. at 7-8 , 601 A.2d 689 (citations omitted) (emphasis added).] Similarly, in State v. Sette, 259 N.J.Super. 156, 189 , 611 A.2d 1129 (App.Div.1992), when charging the jury on the state of mind required to convict defendant of attempted murder, the judge directed the jury “they must find that defendant, “when he stabbed [the victim], did so purposely or knowi | 1 | 1997–1997 |
State v. Federico
green
2 sentences1992See Martin, supra, 119 N.J. at 15-18 , 573 A.2d 1359 (failure adequately to charge on causation); State v. Concep *8 cion, 111 N.J. 373, 381 , 545 A.2d 119 (1988) (inadequate explanation of “reckless manslaughter”); State v. Federico, 103 N.J. 169, 176 , 510 A.2d 1147 (1986) (failure to define release in “safe place” under kidnapping statute). 1992See Martin, supra, 119 N.J. at 15-18 , 573 A.2d 1359 (failure adequately to charge on causation); State v. Concep *8 cion, 111 N.J. 373, 381 , 545 A.2d 119 (1988) (inadequate explanation of “reckless manslaughter”); State v. Federico, 103 N.J. 169, 176 , 510 A.2d 1147 (1986) (failure to define release in “safe place” under kidnapping statute). | 1 | 1992–1992 |
State v. Concepcion
green
2 sentences1992See Martin, supra, 119 N.J. at 15-18 , 573 A.2d 1359 (failure adequately to charge on causation); State v. Concep *8 cion, 111 N.J. 373, 381 , 545 A.2d 119 (1988) (inadequate explanation of “reckless manslaughter”); State v. Federico, 103 N.J. 169, 176 , 510 A.2d 1147 (1986) (failure to define release in “safe place” under kidnapping statute). 1992See Martin, supra, 119 N.J. at 15-18 , 573 A.2d 1359 (failure adequately to charge on causation); State v. Concep *8 cion, 111 N.J. 373, 381 , 545 A.2d 119 (1988) (inadequate explanation of “reckless manslaughter”); State v. Federico, 103 N.J. 169, 176 , 510 A.2d 1147 (1986) (failure to define release in “safe place” under kidnapping statute). | 1 | 1992–1992 |