Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. O'BRIEN

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided December 29, 2009No. A-89 September Term 2008Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Rivera-Soto

To the extent the majority concludes that the trial court’s refusal to provide its written instructions to the jury did not constitute plain error and, hence, “does not warrant our intervention!,]” ante at 540, 984 A.2d at 892, I concur. However, to the extent the majority is of the view that the questioning of defen*542dant and other witnesses by the trial judge exceeded the limits we recently reiterated in State v. Taffaro, 195 N.J. 442, 950 A.2d 860 (2008), I must respectfully dissent. I do so substantially for the reasons cogently expressed by the Appellate Division in affirming defendant’s…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. State v. MacOnSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1971
  2. State v. GuidoSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1963
  3. State v. TaffaroSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2008
  4. State v. RaySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1964
  5. State v. RossSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1979

2 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