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. Marks

July 18, 2008

STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
STEVE MARKS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.



On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Monmouth County, Indictment No. 05-02-0422.

Per curiam.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Submitted April 23, 2008

Before Judges Lihotz and Simonelli.

A jury convicted defendant Steve Marks of third degree resisting arrest, contrary to N.J.S.A. 2C:29-2a(3) (count one); second degree eluding police officers Thomas Matthews (Matthews) and/or Corporal Joseph Fiore (Fiore) of the Howell Township Police Department, contrary to N.J.S.A. 2C:29-2b (count two); third degree aggravated assault on Matthews, contrary to N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1b(1), N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1b(5)(a) and N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1b(2) (counts three, five and eight respectively); and second degree aggravated assault on Matthews while eluding, contrary to N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1b(6) (count nine).*fn1 Judge Uhrmacher sentenced defendant to a four-year term of imprisonment on count one, and a concurrent five-year term of imprisonment on count two. The judge merged counts three, five and eight into count nine and sentenced defendant on count nine to a consecutive five-year term of imprisonment with an eighty-five percent period of parole ineligibility pursuant to the No Early Release Act (NERA), N.J.S.A. 2C:43-7.2, and a three-year period of parole supervision. The judge also suspended defendant's driver's license for one year and imposed the appropriate assessments and penalty.

On appeal, defendant raises the following contentions:

POINT I:

DEFENDANT WAS ENTITLED TO A JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL BECAUSE THERE WAS NO COMPETENT EVIDENCE THAT THE STEVEN MARKS WHO WAS ARRESTED WAS THE DEFENDANT ON TRIAL. (Partially Raised Below)

POINT II:

DEFENDANT'S CONVICTION FOR ELUDING SHOULD BE MERGED INTO HIS CONVICTION FOR AGGRAVATED ASSAULT BY ELUDING. (Not Raised Below)

POINT III:

DEFENDANT'S SENTENCE SHOULD BE REDUCED

(Not Raised Below)

We reject these contentions ...


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.