On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Bergen County, Indictment No. 03-09-1679.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
Submitted February 7, 2011 - Decided Before Judges LeWinn and Coburn.
In September 2003, defendant pled guilty to third-degree theft, N.J.S.A. 2C:21-4, and the State agreed to recommend his admission into the Pre-Trial Intervention Program ("PTI"). On April 15, 2005, after termination of defendant's participation in PTI, he was sentenced to probation for two years. In 2006, we remanded the case for an evidentiary hearing on defendant's termination from PTI. Further proceedings ensued, and finally, on June 4, 2008, defendant's participation in PTI was terminated by court order. The judge did not impose an additional sentence because by then defendant had completed the probationary term earlier imposed.
On appeal, defendant argues that (1) the PTI termination decision was an abuse of discretion because the judge failed to consider the individual circumstances of defendant and the purposes of PTI; and (2) the judge violated due process by denying defendant the right to recall two witnesses and by denying defendant an adjournment to obtain a transcript of the testimony of one of those witnesses.
After carefully considering the record and briefs, we are satisfied that defendant's arguments are without sufficient merit to warrant discussion, R. 2:11-3(e)(2), and we affirm substantially for the reasons expressed by Judge Meehan in his thorough and carefully reasoned opinion of June 4, 2008. Nevertheless, we add the following comment.
We have omitted a detailed description of all the procedural steps that occurred in this convoluted case because doing that would serve no purpose. As Judge Meehan properly found, defendant failed repeatedly to comply with court orders and the terms of the PTI program. The final termination was a sound exercise of judgment.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw ...