Bill > A4729

Introduced Session

This bill establishes a procedure for defendants in certain criminal and juvenile delinquency cases to challenge the admissibility of statements made during a law enforcement interrogation on the basis that the statements are unreliable as evidence. Under the bill, a defendant's statement to law enforcement made during a custodial interrogation conducted at a police station or other place of detention, or while under medical detention, which has been deemed by the court to be unreliable, is inadmissible at trial in criminal or juvenile prosecutions for murder, kidnapping, aggravated manslaughter, manslaughter, robbery, aggravated sexual assault, sexual assault, aggravated criminal sexual contact, criminal sexual contact, second degree aggravated assault, aggravated arson, burglary, violations of Chapter 35 of Title 2C of the New Jersey Statutes (controlled substances) that constitute first or second degree crimes, any crime involving the possession or use of a firearm, or conspiracies or attempts to commit such crime. The bill requires that if the prosecutor intends to introduce a statement made during a custodial interrogation conducted at a police station, a place of detention, or while under medical detention, the prosecutor must provide to the defendant any electronic recordings of the statement and any documents relating to the circumstances under which the statement was obtained and any other evidence the State intends to rely upon to determine the statement's reliability. If the statement was translated from a language other than English, the prosecutor must also provide any evidence the State intends to rely upon to determine the accuracy of the translation. The bill allows a defendant to make a motion prior to trial to exclude a statement alleged to be unreliable. The bill requires the prosecutor to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the statement is reliable. When deciding a statement's reliability, the court is required to consider: (1) whether the details in the statement fit with the evidence known before the interrogation, especially details that describe unusual or not easily guessed facts of the crime that had not been made public; (2) whether the statement provides any new details or any new evidence not known before the interrogation that can be independently corroborated after the interrogation; (3) whether facts of the crime were disclosed to the defendant rather than originated with the defendant; (4) whether the defendant recanted the defendant's statement at any time and the circumstances of that recantation; (5) whether the statement was electronically recorded; (6) the reasonableness of the law enforcement tactics used in eliciting the statement, especially the use of deception, fabrication, false promise, or exaggeration of material facts; and (7) any other information relevant to the reliability of the statement.

AI Summary

Committee Categories

Benjie Wimberly (D)*, 

Introduced, Referred to Assembly Judiciary Committee (on 09/12/2024)

Official Document