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. Louison

October 20, 2008

STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
TITUS P. LOUISON, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.



On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Middlesex County, Indictment No. 04-12-01729-I.

Per curiam.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Submitted September 29, 2008

Before Judges Carchman and Simonelli.

A grand jury indicted defendant Titus Louison for third degree possession of a controlled dangerous substance (CDS) (marijuana), contrary to N.J.S.A. 2C:35-10a(3) (count one)*fn1 and third degree possession of CDS with intent distribute, contrary to N.J.S.A. 2C:35-5b(11) (count two). The charges stemmed from an undercover surveillance. Prior to trial, defendant filed a motion to suppress evidence obtained without a warrant and a motion to compel disclosure of the surveillance site. Judge Venezia denied both motions.

A jury convicted defendant on count two. After denying defendant's motion for a new trial, the judge sentenced defendant to a mandatory extended five-year term of imprisonment, imposed the appropriate assessments and penalties and suspended defendant's driver's license for six months. The judge also found defendant guilty under a separate indictment of violating his probation and imposed a consecutive four-year term of imprisonment.

On appeal, defendant raises the following contention:

POINT ONE

THE DEFENDANT WAS DEPRIVED OF HIS FEDERAL AND STATE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO CONFRONTATION, DUE PROCESS AND A FAIR TRIAL WHEN THE COURT RULED THAT THE STATE DID NOT HAVE TO DISCLOSE THE VANTAGE POINT FROM WHICH THE POLICE VIEWED THE ACTIVITIES THAT LED TO HIS ARREST. U.S. CONST. AMENDS. VI, XIV; N.J. CONST. (1947), ART. I, PARS. 1, 9 AND 10.

In a supplemental brief, defendant raises the following contentions:

POINT TWO

THE CONVICTION AND SENTENCE FOR VIOLATION OF PROBATION ON COUNT TWO OF INDICTMENT NO. 02-10-1213 SHOULD BE REVERSED.

POINT THREE

THE SENTENCE IMPOSED WAS MANIFESTLY EXCESSIVE, UNDULY PUNITIVE AND NOT IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE ...


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.