1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.J.
  4. 135 N.J.
  5. 135 N.J. 3 (1994)
 

STATE v. RODRIQUEZ

135 N.J. 3 (1994)

637 A.2d 914

STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. EMILIO RODRIQUEZ, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Decided March 15, 1994.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Joan D. Van Pelt, Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for appellant (Susan L. Reisner, Acting Public Defender, attorney; Ms. Van Pelt and Katherine Lusby, Designated Counsel, of counsel and on the brief).

Carol M. Henderson, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent (Deborah T. Poritz, Attorney General of New Jersey, attorney).

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed, substantially for the reasons expressed in the Appellate Division opinion, reported at 264 N.J.Super. 261, 624 A.2d 605 (1993).

O'HERN, J., dissenting.

I believe that Rule 3:13-2, which allows the videotaped deposition of a material witness to be used at trial in order to "prevent manifest injustice," does not contemplate the partial...

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