State of New Jersey v. J.r., Defendant-Respondent

Summary

The Court held that the trial judge allowed CSAAS expert testimony that exceeded the narrow rehabilitative scope required by prior New Jersey precedent, but found the error harmless in view of the overwhelming evidence of the victim’s testimony and the defendant’s credibility issues. Accordingly, the Court reversed the Appellate Division’s reversal of the conviction, affirmed the judgment of conviction, and remanded for the Appellate Division to address issues it had not considered.