Legal Opinion

State v. Matulewicz

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided November 21, 1985PublishedCited by 74 opinions

1Per curiam

The issue raised by the defendant, Stanley A. Matulewicz, focuses upon whether a State Police chemist’s laboratory re port, identifying a controlled dangerous substance as marijuana, may be admitted as either a “business entry” pursuant to the hearsay exception in Evidence Rule 63(13) or a “report and finding” of a public official consistent with Evidence Rule 63(15)(a). The Appellate Division, 198 N.J.Super. 474 (1985), reversed the trial court’s order determining that such a report was admissible in evidence, and, remanded the matter for a new trial. The Appellate Division held that the…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Romano v. KimmelmanSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1984
  2. Mahoney v. MinskySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1963
  3. State v. HudesNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1974
  4. Lazorick v. BrownNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1984
  5. State v. McGearyNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1974

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

3Cited by74 opinions

  1. New Jersey Division of Youth & Family Services v. M.C.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2010
  2. State v. ChunSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2008
  3. State v. Julie KuropchakSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2015
  4. Windmere, Inc. v. International InsuranceSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1987
  5. State v. Julie L. Michaels (072106)Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2014

69 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