State v. Kelly
97 N.J. 178, 478 A.2d 364 (1984)
Rule of Law:
Expert testimony on Battered Woman's Syndrome is admissible in a homicide case to help a jury determine the subjective honesty and objective reasonableness of a defendant's belief that deadly force was necessary for self-defense. This testimony is relevant because it helps dispel common myths about battered women that might otherwise prejudice the jury's evaluation of the self-defense claim.
Facts:
- Gladys Kelly was married to Ernest Kelly for seven years, during which Ernest frequently and violently assaulted her, often while drunk.
- Throughout the marriage, Ernest threatened to kill Gladys and to cut off parts of her body if she tried to leave him.
- On May 24, 1980, Ernest attacked Gladys in public, grabbing her dress, choking her, punching her in the face, and biting her leg.
- A crowd gathered and two men separated the couple.
- Shortly after the separation, Gladys saw Ernest running toward her with his hands raised.
- Believing Ernest was about to kill her, Gladys pulled a pair of scissors from her purse and stabbed him.
- Ernest died from the wound shortly thereafter.
Procedural Posture:
- Gladys Kelly was indicted for murder in a New Jersey trial court.
- At trial, Kelly asserted a claim of self-defense and sought to introduce expert testimony on Battered Woman's Syndrome from Dr. Lois Veronen.
- After a voir dire examination, the trial court ruled the expert testimony inadmissible.
- A jury convicted Kelly of reckless manslaughter.
- The Appellate Division affirmed the conviction in an unreported decision.
- The Supreme Court of New Jersey granted certification to review the case.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Is expert testimony concerning Battered Woman's Syndrome admissible to help establish the subjective honesty and objective reasonableness of a defendant's belief that deadly force was necessary for self-defense?
Opinions:
Majority - Wilentz, C.J.
Yes. Expert testimony regarding Battered Woman's Syndrome is admissible as it is relevant to both the honesty and the reasonableness of a defendant's belief that deadly force was necessary for self-defense. The court reasoned that the average juror holds common misconceptions about battered women, such as questioning why they do not leave their abusers. Expert testimony can dispel these myths by explaining the psychological and social dynamics of a battering relationship, including concepts like 'learned helplessness' and the cyclical nature of abuse. This helps the jury understand that a battered woman's failure to leave does not mean the abuse was not severe, and it can help them fairly assess whether her perception of imminent, life-threatening danger was reasonable under the circumstances she experienced.
Concurring-in-part-and-dissenting-in-part - Handler, J.
Yes. While agreeing that the expert testimony is admissible and that the case should be reversed, the dissent argues that the majority should have definitively ruled that Battered Woman's Syndrome is a scientifically reliable and professionally accepted subject for expert testimony, based on the compelling record established at trial. The case should be remanded for a new trial with instructions to admit the evidence, without requiring the admissibility of the syndrome itself to be re-litigated. The record, including Dr. Veronen's testimony and the wealth of scientific literature, is more than sufficient to establish the doctrine's validity, and it is unfair to force the defendant to prove its general acceptance all over again.
Analysis:
This landmark decision was one of the first by a state supreme court to formally recognize Battered Woman's Syndrome as a scientifically reliable subject for expert testimony in self-defense cases. It significantly altered the legal landscape for defendants in domestic violence situations by allowing them to present evidence explaining their unique psychological state and experiences. The ruling effectively tailors the 'reasonable person' standard for self-defense to include the perspective of a reasonable person who has endured a prolonged period of abuse, making the defense more accessible to battered individuals. This case set a powerful precedent followed by many other jurisdictions, fundamentally changing how the legal system understands and evaluates claims of self-defense arising from domestic violence.
Gunnerbot
AI-powered case assistant
Loaded: State v. Kelly (1984)
Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"