Defendant was charged in a twenty-four-count indictment arising from the assault and murder of his former girlfriend and the mother of his children. Before trial, the court granted the State's motion to admit the victim's out-of-court statements under the forfeiture-by-wrongdoing exception to the hearsay rule, N.J.R.E. 804(b)(9), asserting defendant had caused the victim's unavailability with the purpose of preventing her testimony regarding his recent assault of her. At trial, the court denied defendant's request for a passion/provocation manslaughter charge, N.J.S.A. 2C:11-4(b)(2), finding sexual jealousy or rejection did not constitute adequate provocation.
On appeal, defendant argued the court had erred in admitting the victim's statements without adequate findings that he acted with the sole purpose of preventing her testimony, rather than out of jealousy or during a violent confrontation. Defendant also challenged the trial court's refusal to issue a passion/provocation manslaughter charge and the sentence imposed.
The court affirmed, rejecting defendant's argument regarding the admission of the victim's statements and agreeing with courts of other jurisdictions that it need not be shown under this hearsay exception that rendering the witness unavailable was the sole reason for the defendant's conduct. The court also rejected defendant's remaining arguments about the trial court's failure to charge passion/provocation manslaughter and the sentence imposed.