In the case State v.
A.R. the Appellate Division held that the jurors’ unsupervised viewing of
videotaped testimony in the jury room without court supervision required a new
trial.
In that case the judge
trying the case along with the prosecutor and defense attorney were unaware
that two days into this trial the New Jersey Supreme Court decided State v. Burr, 195 N.J. 119 (2008), a case which
I argued to the New Jersey Supreme Court and won. In Burr, the Supreme Court ruled that
in order for the jury to view the tape in context, and that some portions of
the tape are not emphasized over other, the jury must view all videotape
testimony in open court in the presence of the judge and counsel.
Because the Judge and
attorneys were unaware of the Burr decision the trial court allowed the
jury to view the videotape testimony in the jury room in the A.R. case.
The Burr case continues to
be a seminal case in the field of criminal law in the State of New Jersey .
Law Office of Vincent J.
Sanzone, Jr.
277
North Broad Street
P.O.
Box 261
Elizabeth (Union County), New
Jersey 07207
Office Phone No. (908)
354-7006
Cell Phone No. (201) 240-5716
Best NJ Criminal Trial
Attorneys, Best NJ Criminal Trial Lawyers, Best NJ Attorneys, Best NJ Lawyers, Union County NJ criminal lawyer, Best Essex County Criminal
Lawyers, Best Hudson Criminal Lawyers
Dated: December
18, 2012
No comments:
Post a Comment