On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Union County, Indictment No. 05-12-1365.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
Before Judges Winkelstein and Gilroy.
On December 16, 2005, defendant Hugh H. Jeter and co-defendants Lashona Odiase and Joseph Nox were charged by a Union County Grand Jury with third-degree possession of a controlled dangerous substance (CDS) (cocaine), N.J.S.A. 2C:35-10a(1) (Count One); third-degree possession of a CDS with intent to distribute, N.J.S.A. 2C:35-5a(1) and -5b(3) (Count Two); and third-degree possession of cocaine with intent to distribute within 1,000 feet of school property, N.J.S.A. 2C:35-7 (Count Three). On March 28, 2006, the trial court denied their joint motion to suppress evidence. Prior to trial, co-defendant Odiase pled guilty. Tried to a jury, defendant was found guilty on all counts; co-defendant Nox was found not guilty on all counts.
On October 20, 2006, the trial court granted the State's motion to sentence defendant to a mandatory extended term, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2C:43-6f. Following the grant of the State's motion and after finding aggravating sentencing factors N.J.S.A. 2C:44-1a(3) and (9) and no mitigating sentencing factors, the court sentenced defendant on his conviction on Count Three to an extended term of eight years of imprisonment with a four-year period of parole ineligibility. The court also imposed all appropriate fines and penalties, suspended defendant's driving privileges for a period of six months, and merged the convictions on Counts One and Two with the conviction on Count Three.*fn1
On appeal, defendant argues:
THE TRIAL COURT SHOULD HAVE GRANTED THE MOTION TO SUPPRESS.
THE MATTER SHOULD BE REMANDED FOR A HEARING PURSUANT TO [STATE V. LAGARES, 127 N.J. 20 (1992)] WHERE THE PROSECUTOR WILL BE OBLIGED TO STATE HIS REASONS FOR SEEKING AN EXTENDED TERM AND DEFENDANT WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ARGUE THAT THE APPLICATION IS ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS.
THE SENTENCE IMPOSED WAS EXCESSIVE AND NOT IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CODE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE.
We affirm the conviction and sentence, and remand for the trial court to enter an amended judgment of conviction to correctly reflect that defendant was sentenced on Count Three and the convictions on Counts ...