Legal Opinion

State v. Benthall

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided February 1, 2005PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtJustice LaVECCHIA

This criminal appeal involves application of New Jersey Evidence Rule 607, wherein the circumstances under which a party may neutralize surprising testimony from a witness are set forth. Because we conclude that the State was not surprised by the testimony of an uncooperative witness in this matter, the State should not have been permitted to neutralize that witness’s testimony or to use the neutralized testimony for substantive purposes in securing defendant’s conviction. We therefore reverse.

I

A jury convicted defendant, Curtis Benthall, as an accomplice to first-degree robbery, contrary to…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State v. GreenSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1981
  2. State v. CooperSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1952
  3. State v. CottoSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2005
  4. State v. JohnsonNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1987
  5. State v. GallicchioSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1965

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. State v. BurnsSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API