On September 24, 2014, the New
Jersey Supreme Court in State in the Interest of A.B., affirmed the
trial court in allowing defense counsel to examine and take photographs of the
victim’s home where it was alleged that a sexual assault occurred.
The
Supreme Court affirmed that a criminal defendant has a right to a fair trial
and that defense counsel has the right to inspect and examine all the evidence
which the State has access to. In other
words, New Jersey courts
have the “inherent power to order discovery when justice so requires.” State ex rel. W.C., 85 N.J. 218, 221
(1981)
The court began its discussion with
the proposition that New Jersey trial courts have the power to
order discovery beyond that mandated by the court rules when doing so will
further the truth-seeking function or ensure the fairness of a trial. In the
Matter of W.C., 85 N.J. at 221. In
exercising its discretion, a court
must weigh the accused’s need for a particular species of discovery against the
impact the discovery request may have on the privacy and lives of witnesses and
alleged victims.
As the
court noted, a criminal
trial where the defendant
does not have “access to the raw
materials integral to the
building of an effective defense” is
fundamentally unfair. Ake v. Oklahoma, 470 U.S. 68, 77, 105 S. Ct. 1087, 1093, 84 L. Ed. 2d 53, 62
(1985).
In fact the court noted that
visiting the crime scene can be critical in preparing a defense and that
failure to visit the crime scene when required can be ineffective assistance of
counsel. Thomas v. Kuhlman, 255 F. Supp. 2d 99, 109, 112 (E.D.N.Y.
2003) See, also, 32 New Jersey Practice, Criminal Practice and
Procedure § 20:1,
at 481 (Leonard N. Arnold) (2010-2011 ed.)
The court noted that familiarity
with a crime scene may be essential for an effective direct or
cross-examination of a witness. Further,
it might be helpful in ascertaining
and presenting exculpatory evidence.
For example, the inability of a witness to have observed an event because of
the layout of the area can break a case.
In order words,
in many instances the defense will
not be on an equal footing with the prosecution if it is barred from a crime
scene to which the prosecutor has access.
In summary this is a great case for
the defense, is a case which was long overdue by the court and this case should
be in the arsenal of all competent
New Jersey Criminal Defense Attorneys.
September 25, 2014
277
North Broad Street
P.O.
Box 261
Elizabeth, New
Jersey
Telephone No. (908)
354-7006
New Jersey Criminal
Defense Attorney, Essex, Newark, Elizabeth, Union, Monmouth, Middlesex, Hudson,
Federal District Court of New Jersey, Passaic, Bergen, Somerset, Jersey City,
New Brunswick, Toms River, Hackensack, Somerville, NJ Criminal Trial Lawyers,
Attorneys, Sexual Assault Attorney, Criminal Practice and Discovery, Inspection
of Crime Scene
No comments:
Post a Comment