On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Union County, Indictment No. 03-05-435.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
Submitted September 16, 2008
Before Judges Collester and Graves.
In a seventeen-count indictment, defendant William F. Dykeman was charged with committing various offenses against four separate women. A jury convicted defendant of the following offenses: three counts of second-degree sexual assault by committing an act of sexual penetration using physical force or coercion, in violation of N.J.S.A. 2C:14- 2(c)(1) (counts one, eight, and fifteen); three counts of third- degree criminal restraint, in violation of N.J.S.A. 2C:13-2(a) (counts two, five, and twelve); two counts of third-degree terroristic threats, in violation of N.J.S.A. 2C:12-3(b) (counts four and nine); and two counts of fourth-degree unlawful possession of a weapon, in violation of N.J.S.A. 2C:39-5(d) (counts eleven and seventeen). Thus, defendant was found guilty of committing ten offenses, and he was found not guilty on the remaining counts of the indictment.
Prior to sentencing, defendant was evaluated at the Adult Diagnostic and Treatment Center, and it was determined that he did not qualify as a repetitive and compulsive sex offender under N.J.S.A. 2C:47-3. At sentencing on July 15, 2005, the court imposed a nine-year prison term, with an eighty-five percent period of parole ineligibility on counts one, eight, and fifteen to be served consecutively to each other; on count two, defendant was sentenced to a consecutive four-year term, and concurrent terms were imposed on the remaining counts.
Accordingly, defendant received an aggregate sentence of thirty- one years in prison, with twenty-seven of those years subject to the No Early Release Act, N.J.S.A. 2C:43-7.2. Appropriate penalties and assessments, and Megan's Law conditions, were also imposed.
On appeal, defendant presents the following arguments through counsel:
THE MOTION COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION IN DENYING THE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SEVER COUNTS OF THE INDICTMENT AND THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN DENYING THE DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR MISTRIAL.
SINCE THE ISSUE OF DEFENDANT'S IDENTITY WAS NOT IN GENUINE DISPUTE, COUNTS ALLEGING CRIMES ON JANUARY 31, 2001, JULY 11, 2001, JULY 18, 2001 AND IN SEPTEMBER 2001 WERE IMPROPERLY JOINED IN ONE TRIAL.
THE DEFENDANT WAS UNFAIRLY PREJUDICED BY JOINDER.
EXPERT DNA SCIENTIST MADDOX'S REFERENCE TO F.W. AND R.E. AS BEING "VICTIMS" CONSTITUTES PLAIN ERROR (NOT RAISED BELOW).
THE DEFENDANT'S RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL WAS PREJUDICED WHEN THE PROSECUTOR ARGUED IN SUMMATION THAT THE DEFENDANT HAD TAILORED HIS ...