Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Alexander

Decided: March 5, 1987.

STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
KEVIN ALEXANDER, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT



On appeal from the Superior Court, Law Division, Union County, whose opinion is reported at 198 N.J. Super. 594.

Dreier, Shebell, and Stern. The opinion of the court was delivered by Stern, J.A.D.

Stern

Defendant and Charles Givens, Jr. were charged with theft of movable property, an automobile, contrary to N.J.S.A. 2C:20-3; receiving stolen property, the same automobile, contrary to N.J.S.A. 2C:20-7, and volunteering false information to a law enforcement officer with the purpose of hindering their own apprehension, contrary to N.J.S.A. 2C:29-3 b(4).

Defendant was tried by jury, and acquitted of the theft but convicted on the remaining counts.

He was sentenced to two concurrent indeterminate terms at the Youth Correctional Institution Complex to be served concurrently with a sentence he was presently serving for violation of parole. The sentencing judge also imposed a Violent Crimes Compensation Board penalty of $25 on each count.

On this appeal defendant attacks his convictions on eight grounds. His main point headings are the following:

POINT I THE TRIAL JUDGE COMMITTED PREJUDICIAL ERROR WHEN HE DENIED DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ACQUITTAL BECAUSE DEFENDANT DID NOT KNOWINGLY RECEIVE STOLEN PROPERTY WITHIN THE MEANING OF N.J.S.A. 2C:20-6 et seq

POINT II THE TRIAL JUDGE COMMITTED PREJUDICIAL ERROR WHEN HE DENIED DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ACQUITTAL BECAUSE DEFENDANT DID NOT VOLUNTEER INFORMATION TO A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER WITHIN THE MEANING OF N.J.S.A. 2C:29-3(b)(4)

POINT III THE TRIAL COURT CONVICTION MUST BE REVERSED BECAUSE THERE WAS NO REASONABLE SUSPICION TO STOP THE CAR IN WHICH DEFENDANT WAS A PASSENGER (Not Raised Below)

POINT IV THE TRIAL COURT CONVICTION MUST BE REVERSED BECAUSE THERE WAS NO PROBABLE CAUSE TO ARREST DEFENDANT FOR THEFT OF MOVABLE PROPERTY (Not Raised Below)

POINT V DODD'S STATEMENT WAS INADMISSIBLE PURSUANT TO EVIDENCE RULE 65 BECAUSE IT CONTAINED A HEARSAY STATEMENT OF CHARLES GIVENS THAT INCULPATED THE DEFENDANT AND DEPRIVED DEFENDANT OF HIS SIXTH AMENDMENT RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL (Not Raised Below)

POINT VI THE TRIAL COURT CONVICTION MUST BE REVERSED BECAUSE DEFENSE COUNSEL COMMITTED PLAIN ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.