Legal Opinion

State v. Branch

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided February 1, 2005PublishedCited by 117 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Albin

The right of a party to confront witnesses in court is one of the principal values protected by the hearsay rule. The rule generally shields a party from damning out-of-court statements, which are offered for their truth but are not subject to the truth-testing rigors of cross-examination. Our evidentiary rules and case law recognize many exceptions to the hearsay rule that promote both the efficiency and the fact-finding integrity of trials. This appeal explores whether hearsay used by the State to convict defendant of burglary and robbery fell within legitimate exceptions to the hearsay…

2Cases cited42 opinions

  1. Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  2. United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Chambers v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  4. Ohio v. RobertsSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  5. Pointer v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1965

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

3Cited by117 opinions

  1. State v. RoseSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2011
  2. State v. ChunSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2008
  3. State v. LazoSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2012
  4. State v. Jahnell Weaver (069185)Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2014
  5. State v. Julie KuropchakSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2015

112 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