The New Jersey Supreme Court has been considering a number of cases dealing with the ability of police and law-enforcement officers to testify about observations made and their understanding of transactions, language use, and their observations. There are genuine issues of potential mistake and bias surrounding this type of testimony; which arises under New Jersey Evidence Rules 701 and 702 dealing with the opinion testimony of lay witnesses and with expert testimony.

We have previously called for clarification of the admissibility of such evidence, so critical to many criminal cases, and we have previously commented on a number of these issues, but we believe a recent Appellate Division holding sets forth that clarity and should be upheld.

This content has been archived.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]