Submitted by New Jersey Criminal Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark.
State v. Aziz. Decided March 31, 2016
In reviewing the denial of a motion to suppress for an alleged violation of Miranda, we use a “searching and critical” standard of review to protect a defendant’s constitutional rights. State v. Maltese, 222 N.J. 525, 543 (2015) (quoting State v. Hreha, 217 N.J. 368, 381-82 (2014), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___ (2016)). We defer to a trial court’s fact findings on a Miranda motion, if supported by sufficient credible evidence. Hreha, supra, 217 N.J. at 381-82 (citing State v. Johnson, 42 N.J. 146, 161 (1964)). We do not, however, defer to a trial judge’s legal conclusions, which we review de novo. State v. Rockford, 213 N.J. 424, 440 (2013).
The State bears the burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the interrogating officers have complied with Miranda. State v. Yohnnson, 204 N.J. 43, 59 (2010). The trial judge must examine the totality of the circumstances. State v. Adams, 127 N.J. 438, 447-48 (1992).
Legal Developments
That Affect You
-
New Jersey Survivors Justice Act: Sentencing Reform for Abuse Victims
Submitted by New Jersey Criminal Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark In January 2026, New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy signed into law a pair of bills known as the Survivors Justice Act (S-4870/A-5968 and S-4871/A-5969). This landmark legislation, championed by Senator Angela V. McKnight, Senator M. Teresa Ruiz, and other lawmakers, amends the state’s criminal code to allow courts…