State v. Blackmon, 213 N.J. 48

On June 9, 2010, this Court directed the trial court to provide a statement of reasons to facilitate appellate review of its decision not to permit defendant’s step-father to speak at sentencing, citing State v. Blackmon.
Blackmon recognized that there is no absolute right to speak at sentencing for non-defendants, but that many sentencing judges permit family members to address the court and that defendants’ family may also address the court.
Blackmon identified discretionary reasons for allowing speaking and stated judges should exercise discretion in a manner that preserves fairness in the proceedings.
To permit appellate review of discretionary sentencing decisions, the court must accompany the decision with a sufficient statement of reasons.
Because of the paucity of the remand record, the matter was remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.
On remand, the trial judge stated he had no specific recollection of the original decision, offered generic reasons, and concluded those reasons did not adequately explain the exercise of discretion; the original judge is unavailable to provide more particularized reasons.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Adequacy of the remand ruling on who may speak at sentencing	Blackmon framework requires sufficient reasons.	Discretionary decisions may rely on the record and general considerations.	Remand for a more particularized explanation; insufficient prior reasons.
Effect of generic reasoning and unavailable original judge	Generic reasons fail to support discretion under Blackmon.	Remand record can be supplemented; lack of recollection acceptable.	Court adheres to Blackmon; lack of specific recollection undermines rationale.

State v. Blackmon, 202 N.J. 283 (N.J. 2010) (discretionary decision to allow speech at sentencing and required statements of reasons for appellate review)