Judges are required to sanitize inflammatory “other-crimes” evidence to the extent necessary to balance the state’s right to establish a fact and the defendant’s right to a fair trial, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled.

The per curiam, one-sentence decision upheld an appeals court ruling that too many prejudicial details about a defendant’s involvement in the burning death of a dog were used at his trial on charges of robbery and attempted murder. State v. Collier, A-68-98.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]