Strengthening the Sixth
  • Sixth Amendment Rights
    Access to Witnesses and Evidence Confrontation & Cross-Examination Impartial and Representative Juries Public Trial Right to Counsel Speedy Trial Jury Trial
  • About This Project
    About The JFA Grant TTA Sites How to Apply Who We Are
  • Resources
    COVID-19 & 6th Amendment Interactive Discovery Tool Disability Rights Reports
  • Apply Now

New Jersey v. Arteaga Appellate Decision

Important Appellate Decision: Defense Entitled to Face Recognition Information


Documents

  • Arteaga Decision

 

Case Background  

NACDL joined forces with the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) to file an amicus brief in support of the defense in New Jersey v. Arteaga. 

The question before the Appellate Division was whether the defense is entitled to information about how a face recognition search identifying the defendant as the suspect in the case was conducted. The trial court rejected the defense's argument.

Appellate Division's Ruling

On June 6, citing and adopting many of the arguments set forth in NACDL’s co-authored amicus brief, the Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s ruling, holding that the defendant is entitled to the requested discovery in accordance with Brady v. Maryland. 

The court found that “defendant through his expert, and the secondary sources cited by defense counsel and amici, provide us convincing evidence of FRT’s [face recognition technology’s] novelty, the human agency involved in generating images, and the fact FRT’s veracity has not been tested or found reliable on an evidential basis by any New Jersey court.”

The case is now remanded to the lower court for an order directing the state to fulfill the discovery request. 

You can read the full opinion above.

Significance and Impact

This is the first time an appellate court has found that this information is subject to Brady disclosure — an issue that we expect many courts will have to grapple with given the widespread use of face recognition technology in criminal cases. 

The decision recognizes, at the appellate level, a position that defense attorneys around the country have been arguing for years.   

It contains powerful language on the state’s burden to disclose information about face recognition as an unproven technology to uphold the due process rights of a defendant.  

Broadly speaking, this decision will be helpful to defense attorneys filing discovery motions and otherwise seeking to challenge the state’s use of face recognition technology to identify their clients. 

Need help?

Fill out our Google form and we’ll reach out to you.

Go to Google Form

Thank you for signing up

We will be in touch soon.

Strengthening the Sixth


The Center for Justice Innovation is a training and technical assistance provider to the Bureau of Justice Assistance through the Justice for All program. The Center for Justice Innovation (the Center) and its partner are managing, enhancing, and expanding the Strengthening the Sixth website. For more information about the Center, visit www.innovatingjustice.org. The Strengthening the Sixth Website is supported by Grant No. 15PBJA-22-GK-01567-JAGJ awarded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance. The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the Department of Justice’s Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, the Office of Victims of Crimes, and the SMART Office. Points of view or opinions on this website do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. Neither the U.S. Department of Justice nor any of its components operate, control, are responsible for, or necessarily endorse this website, including, without limitations, its content, technical infrastructure, and policies, and any services or tools provided.