On appeal from the Superior Court Of New Jersey, Law Division, Bergen County, Indictment No. 02-07-01674-I.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
Before Judges Stern and A.A. Rodríguez.
On this appeal from an order of April 19, 2007 denying its motion "for remittitur," the surety argues:
THE DETERMINATION OF THE TRIAL COURT WAS AGAINST THE WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE WHERE, AS HERE, THE SURETY PRESENTED CREDIBLE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT ITS CONTENTION THAT DEFENDANT IS DEAD, WHICH EVIDENCE WAS NOT REFUTED BY ANY CREDIBLE EVIDENCE FROM ANY OTHER PARTY.
BASED ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS CASE, AND THE INFORMATION PRESENTED BY THE SURETY, IT IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE COURT TO REMIT SOME PORTION OF THE PREVIOUSLY FORFEITED FUNDS TO THE SURETY.
IT WAS APPROPRIATE FOR THE COURT TO ADDRESS THE QUESTION OF DEFENDANT'S DEATH, AND THE IMPACT OF OF HIS DEATH ON THE REMISSION OF FUNDS TO THE SURETY.
We reject the contentions, and affirm the order.
We have previously affirmed the denial of the surety's application for vacation of judgment and partial remission. See State v. Ramirez, 378 N.J. Super. 355, 371 (App. Div. 2005), which sets out the standards governing vacation of judgment and the granting of a partial remission in this case. Id. at 362-69. We note, among other things, that the death certificate most recently submitted to the Law Division was accompanied by a certification of our Vice Consul in Brazil who attested that the translation of the death certificate was by a "sworn public translator," but not that the death certificate was genuine.
Nor did the affidavits of Gustavo Rugani do Couto e Silva, dated August 15, 2006 and December 20, ...