1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.J.
  4. 244 N.J.
  5. 244 N.J. Super. 261 (1990)
 

STATE v. L.K.

244 N.J. Super. 261 (1990)

582 A.2d 297

STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. L.K., DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Decided October 29, 1990.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

John J. Scaliti, Assistant Prosecutor, argued the cause for appellant (John J. Fahy, Prosecutor of Bergen County, attorney; Sharyn J. Peiffer, Assistant Prosecutor, of counsel; Sharyn J. Peiffer and John J. Scaliti on the letter brief).

Salvatore T. Alfano argued the cause for respondent (Clapp & Eisenberg, attorneys; Edward N. Fitzpatrick of counsel; Salvatore T. Alfano on the brief).

Before Judges J.H. COLEMAN, DREIER and LANDAU.

The opinion of the court was delivered by COLEMAN, J.H., P.J.A.D.

The novel issue presented in this appeal is whether the procedural safeguards regarding the use of hypnotically-enhanced evidence articulated in State v. Hurd, 86 N.J. 525, 432 A.2d 86 (1981), should apply to a defendant or defense witnesses. We hold that they should apply, but additional safeguards must be followed.

This...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases