The Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that despite a trial court's admitting prejudicial testimony by a victim who cited high-profile police brutality cases—as well as lay opinion testimony on the conduct of the defendant officer—the evidence was enough to uphold his conviction.

In State v. Trinidad, former Bloomfield police officer Orlando Trinidad argued that he was denied a fair trial due to Marcus Jeter's testimony and the admission of Bloomfield Police Department Internal Affairs Division Lt. Michael J. Cofone's lay opinion regarding his guilt. He also claimed he should've been granted a judgment of acquittal notwithstanding the verdict, and that his sentence was excessive.

The Appellate Division in an unpublished decision in September 2018 rejected each of his arguments and affirmed the decisions of Essex County Superior Court Judge Michael Ravin, finding no error in the admission of Jeter's testimony referencing high-profile past police brutality cases. It also found that the admission of Cofone's lay opinion did not exacerbate any potential prejudice resulting from its admission and that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in sentencing Trinidad to a five-year prison term. The panel did agree that Trinidad's convictions should have been merged, and remanded for resentencing to merge the counts.

In Wednesday's ruling, the majority of the justices upheld all of the panel's conclusions, holding that evidence of official misconduct and other offenses by Trinidad was overwhelming, and any errors below were harmless and weren't enough to override his sentence and denial of his motion for a judgment of acquittal.

"The trial court erred by admitting both prejudicial testimony and, separately, lay opinion testimony by Cofone as to Trinidad's guilt. Yet, the evidence against Trinidad was overwhelming, and any error was therefore harmless," wrote Justice Walter Timpone in the 39-page majority opinion, joined by Chief Justice Stuart Rabner and Justices Anne Patterson, Lee Solomon and Faustino Fernandez-Vina.

"Trinidad brutally assaulted a defenseless person who was not resisting arrest. He then lied to cover up his crimes," Timpone said. "He simply has not made the requisite showing for waiver or reduction of his mandatory minimum sentence."

New Jersey Supreme Court Justice Barry Albin/Photo: Carmen Natale/ALM

Justice Barry Albin delivered a dissent in which he disagreed that Jeter and Cofone's testimonies did not prejudice the jury, and cautioned against overusing the harmless-error doctrine. Albin was joined by Justice Jaynee LaVecchia in the dissent.

"The egregious trial errors that led to the conviction of Officer Orlando Trinidad on charges related to police misconduct were not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt," Albin said in the 13-page dissent. "Those errors denied Trinidad the fundamental right to a fair trial."

Albin said the trial errors were not harmless and that Jeter's state of mind was not at issue in the case.

"The only issue in this trial should have been a judgment on Trinidad's individual guilt; the court should not have opened the door to a potential jury referendum on police violence in general," wrote Albin. "Permitting the jury to draw a connection to those past cases of police misconduct created an intolerable risk that the jury condemned Trinidad on the basis of collective guilt."

At trial, Trinidad was convicted of official misconduct, tampering with public records, falsifying or tampering with records, false swearing, and simple assault. He was sentenced to a five-year prison term with five years of parole ineligibility.

The American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey and the Latino Leadership Alliance of New Jersey appeared as amici. Arguments were presented on Nov. 4.

Ewing solo David J. Gies, representing Trinidad, said in an email that he was "disappointed in the result" but "pleased that the Court agreed with our arguments regarding the numerous errors which permeated throughout the trial."

He added, "I hope that the dissent's 'note of caution' to not overuse the harmless error doctrine is adhered to."

Deputy Attorney General Kayla Rowe, who contended for the state that Trinidad was convicted based mostly on the considerable amount of evidence against him, had no comment.

Alexander Shalom, senior supervising attorney at the ACLU's New Jersey chapter, argued as an amicus that the error in allowing Cofone's lay opinion alone required a reversal of Trinidad's conviction. Shalom could not be reached for comment on Wednesday's decision.

Dillon McGuire of Pashman Stein Walder Hayden of Hackensack represented the Civil Rights Protection Project of the LLA, which as an amicus took the position that people of color need to be able to testify about their interactions with police and past experiences. McGuire was not available for comment.

According to the decision and past court documents, on a rainy June 7, 2012, evening, Jeter fled his girlfriend's apartment after a domestic violence call, in his car. He was stopped by Bloomfield officers Sean Courter and Albert Sutterlin along the Garden State Parkway.

The officers contended that Jeter refused multiple commands to shut off his car, show his hands, and open the car door. Trinidad, who responded to the scene, stated that he observed Jeter "grabbing Officer Courter[']s service weapon" and that Jeter "struck me in the face with a closed fist," according to portions quoted in the opinion, which noted that Sutterlin's report mirrored Trinidad's.

Despite those reports, Jeter testified that Courter and Sutterlin had their guns drawn, and dashcam footage from Courter and Sutterlin's vehicle corroborated Jeter's testimony. A camera on Trinidad's vehicle showed Jeter's hands up, and he never reached for Courter's gun, based on the footage, the court said.

The dashcam videos further showed that Trinidad and Sutterlin joined Courter in pinning Jeter down while Courter handcuffed him; Jeter never struck any of the officers; Trinidad elbowed Jeter three times in the back of the head; and after Trinidad picked Jeter up, he slammed him onto the hood of his patrol car and punched him in the head, according to the opinion.

After he was charged with eluding, resisting arrest, assault on an officer, trying to disarm an officer, and several motor vehicle offenses, Jeter on June 12, 2012, filed a complaint with the Essex County Prosecutor's Office.

Internal affairs officer Cofone originally exonerated the officers after reviewing incident reports and other evidence. But on April 3, 2013, the prosecutor's office notified Cofone of the dashcam footage, and prosecutors ultimately dropped all charges against Jeter. The state criminally charged Courter and Trinidad, and took them to trial together.

During direct examination, Jeter was asked why he refused to get out of the car. Jeter in his testimony referenced Amadou Diallo, an unarmed man fatally shot by New York police in 1999, and Rodney King, who was caught on video being brutally beaten by Los Angeles police, touching off the 1992 Los Angeles riots, among other cases. Courter's defense counsel objected but then withdrew the objection, according to the decision.

Jeter stated: "I grew up in a society where, you know, you watch these … situations with police brutality—you watch the Sean Bells, the Amadou Diallos, the Rodney Kings, the Oscar [Grants] and the Fruitvale Stations, and … I can testify that I'm a victim of that. I can say that this is my testimony."

The state later called Cofone, who testified that Trinidad and Courter's actions "appeared to have been criminal."

In the majority opinion Wednesday, Timpone said allowing Cofone's testimony did not constitute plain error.

"We cannot find that the error led to an unjust result considering the overwhelming evidence of Trinidad's guilt before the jury," he wrote. "Even considered in conjunction with Cofone's improper remark, we are comfortable Jeter's prejudicial references did not lead to an unjust result."

As for references to police brutality cases, the court agreed the trial judge should have moved "to strike the references altogether," but "that error … was harmless considering the overwhelming evidence of Trinidad's guilt."

"The strength of the State's case leads to no other conclusion," wrote Timpone.

Albin said in the dissent: "I acknowledge that, without the highly prejudicial testimony that undermined the fairness of the trial, the State presented sufficient evidence for a rational jury to return a verdict of guilty. But the means by which a verdict is returned makes a difference. Fundamental fairness and due process make a difference."