post-trial hearing (New Jersey) · Go Syfert
← New Jersey issues

post-trial hearing in New Jersey

7 New Jersey opinions name it 2 courts 1991–2017 0 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.

Followed or applied (2)

CaseFollowedCited
Remmer v. United Statesgreen
scotus · 1954 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
2 sentences

2017In Remmer, the Supreme Court indicated that such a "private communication, contact, or tampering, directly or indirectly, with a juror during a trial about the matter pending before the jury is, for obvious reasons, deemed presumptively prejudicial." Id. at 229 , 74 S. Ct. at 451 , 98 L.

2017In Remmer, the Supreme Court indicated that such a "private communication, contact, or tampering, directly or indirectly, with a juror during a trial about the matter pending before the jury is, for obvious reasons, deemed presumptively prejudicial." Id. at 229 , 74 S. Ct. at 451 , 98 L.

11
cluster 238423green
ca10 · 1956 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1994–1994
1 sentence

1994Therefore, we urge district courts to ask the jury for what purpose it is requesting a magnifying glass or any other tool that could conceivably, albeit unlikely, be used for improper purposes, and to give an instruction when appropriate. [Emphasis added.] [Id at 396-97.] Western Spring Service Co. v. Andrew, 229 F.2d 413, 419 (10th Cir.1956), involved a post-trial claim of jury misconduct, consisting of a contention that the jury foreman brought a magnifying glass to the jury room and used it to examine an allegedly faulty weld in a drive shaft.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Jersey. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (5)

CaseCitedYears
United States v. Tyrone Anthony Gray green
ca3 · 1989
2 sentences

2005Id. at 708-09 .

2005Id. at 708-09 .

12005–2005
State v. Johnson green
nj · 2001
2 sentences

2005In Johnson , the Court held that a post-trial hearing in which a judge finds a NERA predicate, see N.J.S.A. 2C:43-7.2e (deleted by L. 2001, c. 129, § 1), is not constitutionally adequate and "that the factual predicate for a NERA sentence must be found by a jury under the `beyond a reasonable doubt' standard." Johnson, supra, 166 N.J. at 543-44 , 766 A. 2d 1126 .

2005In Johnson , the Court held that a post-trial hearing in which a judge finds a NERA predicate, see N.J.S.A. 2C:43-7.2e (deleted by L. 2001, c. 129, § 1), is not constitutionally adequate and "that the factual predicate for a NERA sentence must be found by a jury under the `beyond a reasonable doubt' standard." Johnson, supra, 166 N.J. at 543-44 , 766 A. 2d 1126 .

12005–2005
Linek v. Korbeil green
njsuperctappdiv · 2000
2 sentences

2003There was an additional letter from [counsel for plaintiff] ... wherein he referred to a recent Appellate Division decision, [ Linek v. Korbeil, 333 N.J.Super. 464 , 755 A. 2d 1229 (App.Div.2000)], and argued again, as he had throughout the entire trial and the post trial hearing and correspondence going back and forth that the court's calculation of the value of [plaintiff's] interest in [defen-dant's] retirement was incorrect.

2003There was an additional letter from [counsel for plaintiff] ... wherein he referred to a recent Appellate Division decision, [ Linek v. Korbeil, 333 N.J.Super. 464 , 755 A. 2d 1229 (App.Div.2000)], and argued again, as he had throughout the entire trial and the post trial hearing and correspondence going back and forth that the court's calculation of the value of [plaintiff's] interest in [defen-dant's] retirement was incorrect.

12003–2003
State v. Brown green
nj · 1990
1 sentence

1993Ibid.

11993–1993
State v. Savage green
nj · 1990
2 sentences

1991In State v. Savage, supra, 120 N.J. 594 , 577 A. 2d 455 , a similar trial-counsel failure — failure even to consider a psychiatric defense — necessitated a post-trial hearing at which trial counsel explained his rationale for the decision.

1991In State v. Savage, supra, 120 N.J. 594 , 577 A. 2d 455 , a similar trial-counsel failure — failure even to consider a psychiatric defense — necessitated a post-trial hearing at which trial counsel explained his rationale for the decision.

11991–1991

Where else courts name it

IL 73 (1973–2025) GA 50 (1977–2026) TX 41 (1982–2025) MS 29 (1991–2023) FL 28 (1966–2021) DC 26 (1978–2015) PA 25 (1967–2026) MO 24 (1981–2025) VA 19 (1989–2025) OH 12 (1990–2021) ID 11 (1989–2023) CA 11 (1971–2025) MT 10 (1990–2018) WV 10 (1983–2026) NY 10 (1969–2012) IA 9 (1985–2026) AL 9 (1989–2013) MI 8 (1977–2021) NJ 7 (1991–2017) HI 7 (1993–2013) KS 7 (1957–2007) MD 6 (1987–2016) SC 6 (1998–2026) MN 6 (1985–2006) OR 6 (1981–2021) WI 6 (1985–2024) LA 5 (1976–2013) IN 5 (1989–2015) WA 5 (1979–2021) TN 4 (1993–2014) DE 4 (1975–2017) KY 4 (1987–2008) AZ 4 (1979–2003) NM 4 (1990–2023) CO 4 (1984–2025) NV 4 (1991–2021) MA 3 (1994–1998) UT 3 (1987–2018) SD 3 (1997–2015) OK 2 (1991–2004) VI 2 (2007–2011) ME 2 (2006–2007) AK 2 (1986–2011) RI 2 (2003–2004)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check