Supreme Court of New Jersey· 1/14/2013

State v. Sowell

Citations

213 N.J. 89
61 A.3d 882
2013 WL 141620
2013 N.J. LEXIS 9

How courts have described this case

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

holding that hypothetical question in criminal case must be limited to facts presented at trial
finding that expert testimony that relates to straightforward facts “encroache[s] on the jury’s fact-finding role”
noting \we do not expect ordinary jurors to understand the difference between drugs possessed for distribution as opposed to personal use\
noting expert testimony is unnecessary to discuss a matter within the jury's competence and understanding
noting \we do not expect ordinary jurors to understand the difference between drugs possessed for distribution as opposed to personal use\
finding error in admission of drug expert's testimony did not require reversal where there was otherwise overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Rabner

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

14 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

18 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.