Legal Opinion
State v. L.K.
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
Decided October 29, 1990PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
COLEMAN, J.H., P.J.A.D.
The novel issue presented in this appeal is whether the procedural safeguards regarding the use of hypnotically-enhanced evidence articulated in State v. Hurd, 86 N.J. 525, 432 A.2d 86 (1981), should apply to a defendant or defense witnesses. We hold that they should apply, but additional safeguards must be followed.
This case deals with an insanity defense based on expert testimony which may rely, at least in part, on hypnotically-aided statements of the defendant. We must decide how the Hurd procedural safeguards must be…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Chambers v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Frye v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1923
- Rock v. ArkansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Estelle v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- State v. KellySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1984
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. ChoinackiNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1999
- State v. LockhartWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1997
- Perrin v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2003
- State v. LKNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1990