Defendant's post-conviction motion for DNA testing was appropriately denied as it was not reasonably probable that a new trial would be granted if the results were favorable to him and it would not change the verdict; the statute allowing evidence not admitted at trial to be considered when deciding whether testing should be ordered post-judgment does not violate fundamental fairness here, where there was sufficient evidence in the record to conclude that there was no reasonable probability of a new trial.
December 13, 2004 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
Presented by BigVoodoo
New Jersey Law Journal honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in New Jersey with their dedication to the profession.
This conference aims to help insurers and litigators better manage complex claims and litigation.
Recognizing innovation in the legal technology sector for working on precedent-setting, game-changing projects and initiatives.
DEPUTY PORT ATTORNEY III Oakland, CA Salary: $17,294 - $21,419/month, 37.5-hr work week Your Port. Your Community. Your Career. Whe...
Stern, Lavinthal & Frankenberg, LLC, is seeking a foreclosure attorney experienced in the NJ and/or NY foreclosure process and default l...
Mineola defense firm seeks attorneys with 3-5 years of actual insurance defense experience to handle complex general liability matters. Sala...
