Legal Opinion

State v. Moore

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided August 21, 2006PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Poritz

This case returns to the Court after remand for a plenary hearing in respect of the continued viability of State v. Hurd, 86 N.J. 525, 432 A.2d 86 (1981), wherein the Court established *185guidelines for the admissibility of hypnotically refreshed testimony proffered by a witness in a criminal trial. Based on the record developed below, and the substantial body of case law that has considered the question since Hurd was decided, we have determined that a change in course is now warranted. We are no longer of the view that the Hurd guidelines can serve as an effective control for the harmful…

2Cases cited43 opinions

  1. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
  2. United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Frye v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1923
  4. Rock v. ArkansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  5. State v. HurdSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1981

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. State v. HendersonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2011
  2. New Jersey Department of Children & Families v. A.L.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2013
  3. State v. ChenSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2011
  4. State v. MeansSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2007
  5. State v. CulverConnecticut Appellate Court · 2006

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