Legal Opinion · Dissent

State ex rel. J.A.

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided June 23, 2008Published

1DissentJustice Rivera-Soto

After Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 124 S.Ct. 1354, 158 L.Ed.2d 177 (2004), trial courts in criminal cases are commanded to engage in a two-step process in deciding the admissibility of hearsay statements. As a necessary threshold inquiry, the court must determine whether the proffered statement is in fact hearsay, that is, whether it is “a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” N.J.R.E. 801(c). If the proffered statement is not hearsay, it is admissible under Evidence…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  2. Tennessee v. StreetSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Zirger v. General Accident InsuranceSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1996
  4. State v. BranchSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2005
  5. Donadio v. CunninghamSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1971

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API