Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State of New Jersey v. Phillip Grant A/K/A Phillip W. Grant

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION


March 14, 2011

STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
PHILLIP GRANT A/K/A PHILLIP W. GRANT, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Passaic County, Indictment No. 98-06-00611.

Per curiam.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Submitted March 2, 2011

Before Judges Cuff and Simonelli.

Following a jury trial, defendant Phillip Grant was convicted of first-degree robbery, N.J.S.A. 2C:15-1, and second-degree conspiracy to commit robbery, N.J.S.A. 2C:5-2 and N.J.S.A. 2C:15-1. Judge Marilyn Clark imposed a discretionary forty-year extended-term sentence with a seventeen-year period of parole ineligibility. Defendant appealed his conviction and sentence. We affirmed. State v. Grant, No. A-1271-99T4 (App. Div. June 22, 2001), certif. denied, 171 N.J. 338 (2002).

Defendant filed a petition for post-conviction relief (PCR), which included contentions relating to his sentence. Judge Clark denied the petition. Defendant appealed, and we affirmed. State v. Grant, A-4541-05T4 (App. Div. May 8, 2008), certif. denied, 196 N.J. 464 (2008).

Defendant then filed a motion to correct an illegal sentence contending that, in imposing the extended-term sentence, Judge Clark relied on some prior convictions that did not relate to defendant. Judge Clark denied the motion because defendant presented no credible evidence indicating that the convictions on which she based his extended-term sentence were not legitimate, and because we had affirmed her denial of defendant's PCR petition, which also addressed his sentence.

In this appeal, defendant again contends that in imposing an extended-term sentence, Judge Clark relied on convictions that did not relate to him. We have considered this contention in light of the record and applicable legal principles and conclude it is without sufficient merit to warrant discussion in a written opinion. R. 2:11-3(e)(2).

Affirmed.

20110314

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.