State v. Henderson and the New Model Jury Charges - New Jersey ...

a-8-08.opn.html
and appropriate jury instructions.
As a result, we believe that it is essential to educate jurors about factors that
can lead to misidentifications, which in and of itself will promote deterrence. To
that end, we have reviewed various system and estimator variables in detail,
which should assist in the development of enhanced model jury charges. Using
those charges in future criminal trials is a critical step in the overall scheme.
We thank Judge Gaulkin, the parties, and amici for their exemplary service in
conducting and participating in a thorough, useful remand hearing. They have
provided a valuable service to the Court and the public.
XIV. Judgment
For the reasons set forth above, we modify and affirm the judgment of the
Appellate Division, and modify the framework for assessing eyewitness
identification evidence in criminal cases. We remand to the trial court for
further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
JUSTICES LONG, LaVECCHIA, ALBIN, RIVERA-SOTO and HOENS join in
CHIEF JUSTICE RABNER’s opinion.
SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY
Appendix A: Remand Order
A- 8 September Term 2008
STATE OF NEW JERSEY,
Plaintiff-Respondent,
v. O R D E R
LARRY R. HENDERSON,
Defendant-Appellant.
http://njlaw.rutgers.edu/collections/courts/supreme/a-8-08.opn.html[4/15/2013 6:04:23 PM]