Supreme Court of New Jersey· 7/27/1999

State v. Martini

Citations

734 A.2d 257
160 N.J. 248
1999 N.J. LEXIS 844

How courts have described this case

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

holding expert testimony may be admitted where the accuracy or trustworthiness of evidence is challenged
holding expert testimony may be admitted where the accuracy or trustworthiness of evidence is challenged
affirming a PCR court's decision to not allow expert testimony because it would not assist the trier of fact
explaining that courts do not question counsels’ reasonable professional judgments
rejecting ineffective assistance claim related to penalty phase of capital trial and observing that \the presentation of evidence of limited mitigating value would have opened the door to powerful countervailing testimony that could have swayed the jury against defendant\
rejecting ineffective assistance claim related to penalty phase of capital trial and observing that “the presentation of evidence of limited mitigating value would have opened the door to powerful countervailing testimony that could have swayed the jury against defendant”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Poritz, Coleman, O'Hern, Handler

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

20 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

87 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this 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.