Supreme Court of New Jersey· 9/22/1988

State v. Rose

Citations

548 A.2d 1058
112 N.J. 454
1988 N.J. LEXIS 99

How courts have described this case

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

concluding that prosecutor’s discussion of non-statutory aggravating factor of future dangerousness was reversible error
deciding that evidence of defendant’s prior statements and acts showing intent to use murder weapon against others was admissible to show purposeful intent and absence of mistake or accident at time of murder
deciding that evidence of defendant's prior statements and acts showing intent to use murder weapon against others was admissible to show purposeful intent and absence of mistake or accident at time of murder
noting that different levels of review will be used depending on whether the instruction was requested, citing Crisantos (Arriagas), or was not, citing Choice
noting that different levels of review will be used depending on whether the instruction was requested, citing Crisantos (Arriagas), or was not, citing Choice
stating that it was improper and unethical for a prosecutor to have elicited otherwise inadmissible evidence from a defense expert which the expert had used in forming her opinion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Clifford, Wilentz, Handler

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

86 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.