State of New Jersey, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Floren Dipaglia, Defendant-Respondent

Summary

The Supreme Court of New Jersey affirmed the defendant's convictions, holding that the burden of proving insanity remains on the defendant by a preponderance of the evidence and that the trial court's reference to a "presumption of sanity" was not reversible error; the prosecutor's improper remarks, while disapproved, were not shown to have prejudiced the trial sufficiently to require reversal. A dissent argued that the cumulative prosecutorial misconduct warranted reversal.