New trials for 2 men after N.J.’s top court changes evidence rules

Aug 08, 2023

New Jersey’s highest court on Wednesday tossed the convictions of a serial bank robber and a man found guilty of robbing a family at gunpoint inside their home over issues with how witness identifications and video evidence was used.

In three separate cases concerning similar legal questions, the state Supreme Court set new rules for prosecutors who want witnesses to make in-court identifications of defendants or have a witness narrate video evidence.

The high court ordered new trials for Quintin D. Watson of Middlesex County and Roberson Burney of Essex County. It found similar evidence issues in a third case involving a Monmouth County man, Dante C. Allen, but determined the evidence of his guilt was so overwhelming the error was harmless.

The trio of rulings concerned overlapping legal questions, namely: What are the rules when a witness is identifying someone in court for the first time? And what are police or expert witnesses allowed to say when they describe evidence like surveillance footage to a jury?

The rulings offer new protections for criminal defendants in the Garden State, presenting new legal hurdles for prosecutors, who will have to either re-try the cases or drop longstanding charges.

The unrelated trials of Watson and Burney both involved victim-witnesses who identified the men for the first time in court at the request of prosecutors after previously having difficulty identifying their attackers.

When it comes to making such first-time identifications in court, Chief Justice Stuart Rabner wrote in the Watson case, “witnesses are asked if they can identify their culprit long after the crime took place.”

The risk for errors is serious, the chief justice wrote.

“They see a single individual seated at the defense table beside a lawyer. And it is evident the prosecution team believes that person is the culprit. The inherently suggestive nature of the procedure, conducted in front of a jury, evades well-settled protections that the law provides.”

Going forward, judges should only allow such first-time, in-court witness identifications in limited cases where there is “good reason.”

The Watson and Allen cases both also included video footage narrated by investigators. The high court found this practice can be similarly “suggestive” to jurors and laid down new guardrails for their use.

In the decision, Rabner wrote that a witness “can assist a jury in determining facts” by explaining what’s going on in video evidence such as surveillance or police body camera footage, but not offer “continuous, running commentary” that could prejudice a jury.

Watson’s criminal record involves a series of bank robberies, according to court documents and news clippings. The justices on Wednesday ordered a new trial.

Brynn Krause, a spokeswoman for the Middlesex County Prosecutor’s Office, said the office “abides by the judgment of the Court.”

Burney was given a life sentence for a Christmas Day 2015 home invasion in Bloomfield, in which prosecutors said he held a woman and two young girls at gunpoint, bound them and burglarized their home.

Frank J. Ducoat, an acting assistant prosecutor in Essex County, said in a statement to NJ Advance Media his office was “grievously disappointed by today’s decision”

“In reaching its conclusion, a majority of the court ignored both the overwhelming evidence of Mr. Burney’s guilt and the reasoned judgment of twelve Essex County residents who heard the evidence firsthand and came to a just conclusion,” he said.

Prosecutors intend to retry the case, he added.

“We look forward to once again bringing him to justice,” Ducoat said.

Our journalism needs your support. Please subscribe today to NJ.com.

S.P. Sullivan may be reached at [email protected].

If you purchase a product or register for an account through one of the links on our site, we may receive compensation. By browsing this site, we may share your information with our social media partners in accordance with our Privacy Policy.