On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part, Passaic County, Docket No. FO-02-1168-09.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
Submitted October 12, 2010 - Decided Before Judges Lisa and Alvarez.
Defendant Ryan Zylstra appeals from a disorderly persons conviction resulting from his violation of a final restraining order (FRO) issued under the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act (the Act), N.J.S.A. 2C:25-17 to -35. See N.J.S.A. 2C:29-9(b). Defendant was subject to the mandatory sentencing provisions of N.J.S.A. 2C:25-30, as this was his second contempt conviction. Accordingly, he was placed on a year's probation, required to serve thirty days in county jail,*fn1 pay a $50 Violent Crimes Compensation Board penalty, and a $75 Safe Neighborhood assessment. We affirm.
The complaint alleged that defendant on February 23, 2009, while in Wayne Township, violated the FRO "by following the [complainant], [K.P.], . . . and did continue to follow the complain[ant] in a vehicle, through Wayne Township into the Town of Oakland . . . ." The December 4, 2008 FRO prohibited defendant from contact with K.P., from following her, or from going to her home or place of employment.
K.P. testified at the contempt trial that on the date in question, when she arrived at her job at approximately 9:00 a.m., she noticed defendant driving by on a side road. After work, she went to a gym in Wayne.
When K.P. left the gym at about 7:30 p.m., she saw defendant again, this time parked directly in front of the facility. As she put it, she had a "perfect view" of him seated in his car. K.P. was also familiar with the license plate on defendant's vehicle, and recognized the number. She walked from the front door of the gym to her own car, parked a short distance from defendant. He drove away after a moment, headed towards West Paterson on Hamburg Turnpike.
K.P. proceeded in the opposite direction on Hamburg Turnpike towards Oakland. Once she rounded the corner, within a minute, defendant pulled in behind her; there were no cars between them. K.P. slowed to a crawl and put on her hazard lights, maneuvering onto the right-hand shoulder. Defendant followed her for a couple of miles, finally turning off at a side road. While being followed, K.P. called defendant's mother; she also called and attempted to speak with defendant's attorney. K.P.'s mother testified briefly, corroborating that her daughter sent her a text message when defendant passed her at the front door of her workplace that morning. K.P. immediately reported the day's events to the police. This was the sum and substance of the trial.
When the judge found defendant in contempt of the domestic violence restraining order, he stated the obvious - the testimony of the victim in this case "is not contradicted by any testimony on behalf of the [d]efendant." The judge reiterated K.P.'s testimony, and concluded that "the actions of the [d]efendant constitute a knowing violation of the restraining order."
On this appeal, defendant argues:
POINT I DEFENDANT'S ACTIONS AT WORLD'S GYM DO NOT AMOUNT TO A VIOLATION OF THE FINAL RESTRAINING ORDER NOR SUPPORT A FINDING OF GUILTY BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT
POINT II THE DEFENDANT'S ACTIONS IN DRIVING HIS VEHICLE BEHIND THE COMPLAINANT'S VEHICLE DID NOT AMOUNT TO A KNOWING FOLLOWING OF THE COMPLAINANT IN VIOLATION OF THE RESTRAINING ORDER
POINT III COMPLAINANT'S OBSERVATION OF DEFENDANT IN MAHWAH IS IRRELEVANT AS TO PROOF OF GUILT IN THIS CASE
POINT IV ALTERNATIVELY, THE DECISION MUST BE REVERSED AND THE CASE REMANDED FOR A NEW TRIAL BECAUSE THE TRIAL COURT IMPERMISSIBLY SHIFTED ...