Supreme Court of New Jersey· 2/9/1988

State v. D.R.

Citations

109 N.J. 348
537 A.2d 667
1988 N.J. LEXIS 3

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding Appellate Division’s unilateral adoption of new evidence rule inappropriate given “serious and far-reaching nature of the rule”
observing that “young children ... do not necessarily regard a sexual encounter as shocking or unpleasant, and frequently relate such incidents to a parent or relative in a matter-of-fact manner”
refusing to adopt by judicial decision a rule providing for the admissible out-of-court statements by juvenile victims of sexual abuse
listing a number of reasons why a child's in-court testimony may be less reliable than a prior testimonial statement
explaining the holding in Miller precludes the Court from merging convictions of child endangering, N.J.S.A. 2C:24-4(a), aggravated sexual assault, N.J.S.A. 2C:14-2(a), and sexual assault, N.J.S.A. 2C:14-2(b)
N.J. did not have the residual \catchall\ exceptions such as I.R.E. 803(24) and 804(b)(5

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Stein

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

77 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

20 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named State v. D.R.

20 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.