STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. DARRION K. TRENT (17-11-0775, HUDSON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE), A-4682-18

Background:

June 4, 2016 shooting in Jersey City captured on surveillance: Davon Gordon was shot multiple times and later died; Terrell Corbin was shot and then beaten by a group.
Defendant Darrion K. Trent (and three co-defendants) were identified on video and at trial; only Trent was charged with murder; others faced related assault/weapon charges.
State introduced surveillance video, witness identifications, and medical examiner testimony about bullet trajectories indicating shots entered from the front and traveled upward (consistent with a shooter standing near the victim's feet and slightly to the right if the victim lay face up).
Defense sought to exclude the medical examiner's opinion as undisclosed expert testimony, to cross-examine Corbin about the specific nature of a prior conviction, and objected to portions of the prosecutor's summation and certain jury instructions.
Trial court admitted the ME testimony, limited cross-examination of Corbin, overruled or sustained various summation objections without curative instruction, and charged the jury on murder and accomplice liability; jury convicted and court sentenced Trent to 30 years with NERA parole ineligibility.
On appeal the Appellate Division reviewed (abuse of discretion standard) and affirmed, rejecting claims of discovery violation, unfair impeachment limitation, prosecutorial misconduct, and jury charge error.

Issues:

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admission of medical examiner's testimony absent supplemental expert report	State: ME's written report contained the underlying observations (wound descriptions/trajectories); no intent to mislead and defense had notice	Trent: ME gave new interpretive testimony about shooter location that should have been disclosed in a supplemental report	Court: Admission proper—observations were in report, no surprise or prejudice; no supplemental report required; testimony admissible and jury instructed on expert evidence
Cross-examination about the specific nature of Corbin's prior conviction	State: conviction admissible under N.J.R.E. 609 for impeachment; parties elicited relevant parole status information at trial	Trent: restricting cross-examination prevented showing motive to lie (parole revocation risk)	Court: No error—jury knew Corbin was on parole and had reported the incident; specifying offense type was not required and limiting was permissible
Prosecutor's summation comments (alleged misconduct)	State: remarks were fair inferences from video and evidence, responsive to defense, and not inflammatory; objections were sustained where appropriate	Trent: summation included inflammatory, prejudicial statements, improper commentary on unproved facts and on defendant's silence	Court: No reversible misconduct—comments were within evidence or reasonable inferences; sustaining objections and the judge's final charge cured any minimal prejudice
Jury instructions (accomplice liability and lesser-included offenses)	State: accomplice instruction appropriate for aggravated assault of Corbin; evidence supported SBI murder, so lesser-included aggravated manslaughter unnecessary	Trent: accomplice theory inapplicable to a street fight; court should have charged lesser-included offenses	Court: Instructions proper—video and witness evidence supported accomplice theory for the assault charge; evidence of multiple shots supported SBI murder, so no lesser-included charge was required

Key Cases Cited

State v. Buda, 195 N.J. 278 (2008) (appellate review of evidentiary rulings; abuse of discretion standard)
State v. Stein, 225 N.J. 582 (2016) (discovery rules for expert testimony and deference to trial court discovery rulings)
State v. LaBrutto, 114 N.J. 187 (1989) (factors for admitting expert testimony despite discovery issues)
State v. Washington, 453 N.J. Super. 164 (App. Div. 2018) (standards for permitting expert testimony under Rule 3:13-3)
State v. Martini, 131 N.J. 176 (1993) (permitting hypotheticals to experts and cross-examination with omitted facts)
State v. McNeil-Thomas, 238 N.J. 256 (2019) (standard for reversal based on prosecutor's summation)
State v. R.B., 183 N.J. 308 (2005) (limits on summation and improper remarks leading to prejudice)
State v. Timmendequas, 161 N.J. 515 (1999) (assessing prosecutorial impropriety and remedial measures)
State v. Wilder, 193 N.J. 398 (2008) (elements distinguishing serious bodily injury murder from lesser offenses)
State v. Jenkins, 178 N.J. 347 (2004) (aggravated manslaughter vs. SBI murder analysis)
State v. Cruz, 163 N.J. 403 (2000) (extreme indifference and aggravated manslaughter framework)