State v. Provet
| Decision Date | 26 June 1975 |
| Citation | 68 N.J. 174,343 A.2d 462 |
| Parties | STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. JEROME PROVET. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Petition for certification denied. (See 133 N.J. Super. 432)
To continue reading
Request your trial
12 cases
-
State v. Marks
... ... Page 532 ... a prior inconsistent statement affecting his credibility as a witness. Cf. State v. Williams, 182 N.J.Super. 427, 433-434, 442 A.2d 620 (App.Div.1982); State v. Provet, 133 N.J.Super. 432, 437-438, 337 A.2d 374 (App.Div.1975), certif. den. 68 N.J. 174, 343 A.2d 462 (1975). See also IIIA Wigmore, Evidence § 1042, pp. 1056-1061 (Chadbourn rev. 1970). Once a defendant makes post-arrest statements that may arguably be inconsistent with his exculpatory trial ... ...
-
State v. Lopez
... ... And see State v. Rodriguez, 234 N.J.Super. 298, 304-05, 560 A.2d 1233 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 117 N.J. 656, 569 A.2d 1350-51 (1989); State v. D'Amato, 218 N.J.Super. 595, 604-05, 528 A.2d 928 (App.Div.1987), certif. denied, 110 N.J. 170, 540 A.2d 169 (1988); State v. Provet, 133 N.J.Super. 432, 439-40, 337 A.2d 374 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 68 N.J. 174, 343 A.2d 462 (1975) ... Page 307 ... Here, the indictment clearly charged defendant with the use of a deadly weapon. Whether the weapon was a machine gun, pistol or knife may have triggered ... ...
-
State v. Leopardi
... ... denied, 142 N.J. 453, 663 A.2d 1360 (1995); State v. Ross, 162 N.J.Super. 47, 51, 392 A.2d 210 (App.Div.1978), aff'd in part, rev'd in part, 80 N.J. 239, 403 A.2d 457 (1979); State v. Ramos, 217 N.J.Super. 530, 538, 526 A.2d 284 (App.Div.1987); State v. Provet, 133 N.J.Super. 432, 436-38, 337 A.2d 374 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 68 N.J. 174, 343 A.2d 462 (1975) ... The evidence was sufficient to withstand defendant's motion for a judgment of acquittal, and the jury's verdict did not constitute a miscarriage of justice. Giving the State ... ...
-
State v. Ross
... ... The essential examination was by the prosecutor and defense counsel. During the course of the prosecutor's examination of Cecil Hill two statements she had made to police were admitted as substantive evidence on the authority of State v. Provet, 133 N.J.Super. 432, 337 A.2d 374 (App.Div.1975), certif. den. 68 N.J. 174, 343 A.2d 462 (1975), and Evid.R. 63(1)(a). She was later called as a witness for the defense. Each of the other court witnesses was examined in a similar manner and questioned about his or her prior statements. Two of ... ...
Request a trial to view additional results