State v. Carrion

Summary

Justice Zarella, joined by Justices Espinosa and Vertefeuille, concurred in the judgment concerning the defendant's evidentiary and constitutional claims but disagreed with the majority's use of supervisory authority. The concurrence would require the same limiting principles in every supervisory-authority case: traditional protections must be inadequate, and the issue must affect the perceived fairness of the judicial system as a whole. It concluded those conditions were not met because the challenged jury instruction was factually correct and did not threaten systemic fairness.