Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Randolph

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided June 18, 2012No. A-87 September Term 2010, 067218Published

1DissentJustice Patterson

The majority holds that defendant Buddy Randolph should have been permitted to present rehabilitation evidence to the trial court following the Appellate Division’s remand. Its decision is premised upon a broad construction of the Appellate Division’s order directing the trial court to conduct a new sentencing proceeding. The majority concludes that the Appellate Division intended that the trial court conduct an unlimited resentencing on remand, and that defendant consequently was entitled to offer evidence of his post-conviction rehabilitation at his resentencing hearing.

I agree with the…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. State v. RothSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1984
  2. State v. YarboughSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1985
  3. State v. NataleSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2005
  4. State v. O'DONNELLSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1989
  5. State v. HodgeSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1984

17 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