On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Passaic County, Indictment No. 05-02-0210-1.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
Submitted January 8, 2008
Before Judges Yannotti and LeWinn.
Defendant, Ronald Hinton, was charged under a Passaic County indictment with possession of cocaine, N.J.S.A. 2C:35-10(a)(1) (count one); possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, N.J.S.A. 2C:35-5(a)(1) and (b)(3) (count two); possession of cocaine with intent to distribute within 1000 feet of school property, N.J.S.A. 2C:35-7 and N.J.S.A. 2C:35-5(a) (count three); possession of heroin, N.J.S.A. 2C:35-10(a)(1) (count four); possession of heroin with intent to distribute, N.J.S.A. 2C:35-5(a)(1) (count five); possession of heroin with intent to distribute within 1000 feet of school property, N.J.S.A. 2C:35-7 and N.J.S.A. 2C:35-5(a) (count six); and resisting arrest, N.J.S.A. 2C:29-2(a)(2) (count seven). All charges were for third-degree offenses, except resisting arrest which was an offense of the fourth degree.
Defendant was tried to a jury and found guilty on all charges. At sentencing, the judge granted the State's motion to impose a mandatory extended term pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2C:43-6(f). On count three, the judge imposed a ten-year term, with a five-year period of parole ineligibility. On count six, the judge imposed a concurrent five-year term, with a three-year period of parole ineligibility. On count seven, defendant received a concurrent eighteen-month term. The remaining counts were merged with either counts three or six.
Defendant raises the following issues on appeal:
STATEMENTS MADE BY THE PROSECUTOR DURING CLOSING ARGUMENTS RESULTED IN SUBSTANTIAL PREJUDICE TO DEFENDANT'S FUNADAMENTAL RIGHT TO HAVE THE JURY FAIRLY ASSESS THE CASE AGAINST HIM (Not Raised Below)
THE STOP OF DEFENDANT WAS NOT BASED ON ANY REASONABLE AND ARTICULATE SUSPICION AND VIOLATED THE DEFENDANT'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS UNDER STATE AND FEDERAL LAW AND DEFENSE COUNSEL WAS CONSTITUTIONALLY INEFFECTIVE IN FAILING TO MAKE A MOTION SUPPRESSING THE EVIDENCE.
U.S. CONST. AMENDS. VI AND XIV; N.J. CONST. (1947), ART. I, PARS. 1 AND 10 (Not Raised Below)
BASED ON A CAREFUL SCRUTINY OF THE TOTALITY OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES, A GUILTY VERDICT ON THE CHARGE OF RESISTING ARREST WAS CLEARLY AGAINST THE WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE
THE STATE FAILED TO PROVE BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT THE ELEMENT OF INTENT TO DISTRIBUTE DRUGS; CONSEQUENTLY THE CONVICTIONS ON COUNTS ONE AND ...