State of New Jersey, Plaintiff-Respondent v. Robert Smith, Defendant-Appellant

Summary

The Supreme Court of New Jersey held that the prosecutor's closing‑argument remarks suggesting that defense experts might shade their testimony to secure future employment were improper prosecutorial misconduct that was not harmless, and therefore warranted a new trial. The Court reversed the Appellate Division’s affirmation of the conviction and remanded for a new trial, noting that the curative instruction was insufficient to cure prejudice.