Stuart Rabner

State v. Chen

Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2011-08-24 · cited 40×

In State v. Chen, the case involved a criminal prosecution where the victim identified the defendant as her attacker after the victim's husband showed her photos of his ex-girlfriend, leading to repeated viewings before a police photo array and trial identification. The trial court denied the defendant's request for a Wade hearing to challenge the identification's admissibility on grounds that no government officials had engaged in suggestive conduct. The court held that even absent state action, when a defendant shows highly suggestive circumstances by private parties that could produce a mistaken identification, trial judges must hold a pretrial hearing upon request to assess reliability and admissibility. This ruling was based on social science research indicating that private suggestiveness can undermine eyewitness reliability and inflate confidence, consistent with the judiciary's gatekeeping duty to prevent unreliable evidence from reaching jurors. The matter was remanded for such a hearing, while affirming the conviction in other respects.

criminal lawprocedure

Too Much Media, LLC v. Hale

Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2011-06-07 · cited 17×

The case involved a defamation and false light lawsuit brought by Too Much Media, LLC and its principals against Shellee Hale for comments she posted on an online message board about their software used in the adult entertainment industry. Hale claimed protection under New Jersey’s Shield Law as a self-described journalist investigating corruption in the industry. The New Jersey Supreme Court held that the Shield Law does not apply to individuals posting comments on Internet message boards, as these forums are not similar to traditional news sources like newspapers or magazines. The court reasoned that while the law offers broad protection to the news media, extending it to unfiltered message board posts would go beyond the Legislature's intent, and affirmed the denial of the privilege while providing guidance for future applications.

free speechtorts & liability

State v. Miller

Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2011-03-14 · cited 220×

In State v. Miller, the defendant was convicted of multiple counts including robbery, burglary, and weapons offenses stemming from an armed robbery of construction workers, and he appealed on grounds including the trial court's decision to allow the jury to view video-recorded testimony of a victim during deliberations, jury instructions regarding the defendant's decision not to testify, and the imposition of consecutive sentences. The New Jersey Supreme Court held that the video playback procedure in open court was proper and consistent with guidelines for handling such requests in cases without a court reporter, that the jury instructions did not violate the defendant's rights, and that the conviction should stand. However, the court remanded the case for resentencing because the trial court failed to adequately address the Yarbough factors when deciding on consecutive sentences for the two robbery counts. The core reasoning emphasized adapting court procedures to technological changes while ensuring fairness, and the need for clear sentencing analysis to allow proper appellate review.

criminal lawprocedure

State v. Brown

Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2011-01-25 · cited 49×

This case concerned the validity of a warrantless arrest of defendant Daniel Brown and the admissibility of his subsequent incriminating statements to police after he was advised of his Miranda rights. Brown was implicated in a series of armed robberies and car thefts by statements from co-defendants, leading police to prepare complaints but without obtaining judicial authorization for arrest warrants before proceeding to his girlfriend's apartment. When officers knocked, Brown fled out a window onto an adjacent public roof, resulting in a standoff and his arrest; the trial court denied his motion to suppress the statements, and the Appellate Division affirmed on attenuation grounds. The court affirmed on different grounds, holding that the arrest was lawful because police had probable cause from the co-defendants' statements, Brown had fled to a public area where no warrant was required, and his observed resistance provided independent grounds for arrest, rendering the defective warrants irrelevant and the statements admissible.

criminal lawprocedure

State v. JG

Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2010-04-07

State v. McCabe

Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2010-01-25 · cited 76×

Affiliations

Decision record

Stuart Rabner

Affiliations

Decision record