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. Williams

January 8, 2009

STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
NATE WILLIAMS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.



On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Union County, Indictment No. 05-08-0859.

Per curiam.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Argued November 17, 2008

Before Judges Lisa and Alvarez.

Defendant, Nate Williams, was found guilty by a jury of third-degree cocaine distribution, N.J.S.A. 2C:35-5(a)(1) and (b)(3) (count one), and second-degree distribution of cocaine within 500 feet of a public park, N.J.S.A. 2C:35-7.1(a) (count two). Defendant was sentenced on count one to a mandatory extended term, N.J.S.A. 2C:43-6(f), of eight years subject to four years of parole ineligibility. A concurrent eight-year term of imprisonment with four years of parole ineligibility was imposed on count two.

Defendant raises the following contentions:

POINT I WILLIAMS'S CONVICTION MUST BE REVERSED BECAUSE THE COURT ERRED IN PERMITTING OFFICER FRANKLIN TO OFFER INADMISSIBLE OPINION TESTIMONY AND IN FAILING TO GIVE ANY INSTRUCTION ON THE TESTIMONY (NOT RAISED BELOW)

A. THE COURT ERRED IN ALLOWING FRANKLIN TO TESTIFY AS AN EXPERT

B. THE COURT ERRED IN FAILING TO INSTRUCT THE JURY AS TO HOW IT SHOULD RECEIVE AND EVALUATE FRANKLIN'S EXPERT TESTIMONY

POINT II WILLIAMS'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS THE OUT-OF-COURT IDENTIFICATION SHOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED BECAUSE THE IDENTIFICATION PROCEDURE WAS IMPERMISSIBLY SUGGESTIVE

A. FAILURE TO UTILIZE AN INDEPENDENT OFFICER TO CONDUCT THE PHOTOGRAPHIC IDENTIFICATION PROCEDURE WAS A MATERIAL VIOLATION OF SECTION IA OF THE GUIDELINES

B. FAILURE TO UTILIZE A SEQUENTIAL PHOTO ARRAY CONSISTING OF AT LEAST SIX PHOTOGRAPHS WAS A MATERIAL VIOLATION OF SECTION IE4 OF THE GUIDELINES

C. FAILURE TO RECORD THE NECESSARY DETAILS OF THE PHOTOGRAPHIC IDENTIFICATION PROCEDURE WAS A MATERIAL VIOLATION OF SECTION II OF THE GUIDELINES AS WELL AS CONTRARY TO STATE V. DELGADO

POINT III THE SENTENCING COURT SHOULD HAVE MERGED THE DISTRIBUTION CONVICTION INTO THE CONVICTION FOR DISTRIBUTION OF C.D.S. WITHIN 500 FEET OF A ...


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.