1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.J.
  4. 61 N.J.
  5. 61 N.J. 544 (1972)
 

STATE v. ANDRETTA

61 N.J. 544 (1972)

296 A.2d 644

STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. THOMAS ANDRETTA AND ARMAND FAUGNO, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Decided November 13, 1972.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Mr. John J. Pribish, Assistant Prosecutor, argued the cause for the plaintiff-appellant (Mr. John S. Kuhlthau, Middlesex County Prosecutor, attorney).

Mr. Harvey Weissbard and Messrs. Querques, Isles & Weissbard, attorneys for the defendant-respondent Thomas Andretta.

Mr. Robert M. Lewandowski argued the cause for the defendant-respondent Armand Faugno (Messrs. Lynch, Mannion, Lutz & Lewandowski, attorneys).

The opinion of the Court was delivered by PROCTOR, J.

This case brings the method of voice identification through the use of the spectrogram, the so-called voiceprint, before us once more. We previously considered this method in State v. Cary, 49 N.J. 343 (1967), on remand 99 N.J.Super. 323 (Law Div. 1968), remanded again 53 N.J. 256 (1969), aff'd

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