The Defendant charged with assault tweeted, “shoe to ya face” to the victim.
The State in the prosecution of the defendant proffered a tweet by the defendant which was admitted by the trial court. The defendant objected on appeal and argued that the tweet was not properly authenticated, and could have been easily forged. The defendant was convicted and appealed.
The appellate division in State v. Hannah (December 20, 2016), held that the tweet was admissible and that in this case there was sufficient circumstantial evidence that the tweet in fact had come from the defendant. In all such cases the court held that the traditional rules set forth in N.J.R.E. 901, and that each case in which this type of evidence is being moved into evidence court must examine the rule, and admit such evidence if admitting such evidence would not be an abuse of discretion.
Law Office of Vincent J. Sanzone, Jr., Esq.30-years of experience as criminal lawyer in Elizabeth, Newark, Jersey City, New Brunswick, Union, Hudson, Middlesex and Essex County