On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Camden County, Indictment No. 07-08-2647.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
Submitted January 24, 2011
Before Judges Lisa, Sabatino, and Alvarez.
After a jury trial, defendant Angelo L. Feliciano was convicted of third-degree unlawful possession of a handgun, N.J.S.A. 2C:39-5b; and second-degree unlawful possession by certain persons not authorized to have a weapon, N.J.S.A. 2C:39-7.
The handgun was found by the police in defendant's waistband during a pat-down search incident to his arrest after a motor vehicle stop. The trial court initially sentenced defendant as a persistent offender under N.J.S.A. 2C:44-3a to an aggregate ten-year custodial term, which was thereafter modified on reconsideration to a five-year term with a five-year period of parole ineligibility on the second-degree offense, with a concurrent four-year term with a two-year parole disqualifier on the third-degree offense.
On appeal, defendant raises the following points for our consideration:
A. It was plain error to admit the handgun into evidence because it is the fruit of an illegal search and arrest in violation of Feliciano's 4[th] Amendment Rights, not raised below.
B. It was plain error not to apply the warrant requirement standard, because the arrest of Feliciano was not a search incident to arrest, consent search or exigent circumstances, not raised below.
A. Feliciano was denied due process and a fair trial [b]ecause evidence was withheld that impeaches a state
[w]itness's credibility; this requires that his [c]onviction be reversed, plain error, not raised below.
B. It was plain error to admit handgun evidence when insufficient credible evidence was presented at the suppression hearing and trial, resulting in an unjust result, not raised below.
A new trial is required based on newly discovered material videotape evidence withheld by Lieberum in violation of Feliciano's [r]ight to due process and fair trial, plain error, not raised below.
The State's failure to produce an exculpatory [v]ideotape violated Brady and requires remand [f]or a full evidentiary hearing, plain error. Not raised below. POINT V
A. The court abused its discretion by denying [t]he defense an adverse witness charge and [t]he prosecution's removal of witnesses caused Feliciano to suffer actual harm.
B. The court's allowing a jury charge to infer [p]ossession of a gun by Feliciano contrary [t]o what inherently reliable fingerprint identification ...