holding that because juries bear sole “responsibility in passing on the issue of life or death,” juries are obligated to confront that issue without consideration of the possibility of appeal
How later courts described this case
- holding that because juries bear sole “responsibility in passing on the issue of life or death,” juries are obligated to confront that issue without consideration of the possibility of appeal
- “where a life is at stake, this court does not hesitate in the interests of justice to invoke the plain error rule and to reverse where the trial errors were impregnated with the likelihood of having harmed the substantial rights of the defendant.” (citation omitted)
Written by the judges who cited it.
Distinguished
Distinguished by Walker v. Butterworth, 457 F. Supp. 1233 (1978)
30 N.J. 195, 212-15, 152 A.2d 343 (1959), were distinguishable because these remarks were not intended to dilute the jurors’ appreciation for the significance, correctness, or permanence of their verdicts.
The opinion
Proctor, J. (concurring).
I vote to reverse and in doing so I concur in the opinion of the majority with the exception of that part which deals with the admission or exclusion *225 of testimony relating to defendant’s background, and in that respect I agree with the views expressed by Mr. Justice Burling in his concurring opinion.
Burling, Proctor and Hall, JJ., concurring in result.
For reversal — Chief Justice Weintraub, and Justices Burling, Jacobs, Erancis, Proctor, Hall and Schettino — 7.
For affirmance — None.