Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

State of New Jersey v. Anthony S. Coplin

May 23, 2011

STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
ANTHONY S. COPLIN, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.



On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Bergen County, Indictment No. 08-04-0644.

Per curiam.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Submitted February 16, 2011

Before Judges Gilroy and Ashrafi.

On April 16, 2008, a Bergen County Grand Jury charged defendant Anthony Coplin with fourth-degree making false statements for the purpose of procuring a credit card, N.J.S.A. 2C:21-6b (count one); third-degree fraudulent use of a credit card, N.J.S.A. 2C:21-6h (count two); and third-degree exhibiting a false document, N.J.S.A. 2C:21-2.1c (count three). On October 26, 2009, defendant pled guilty to all counts of the indictment. On November 10, 2009, defendant filed a motion to withdraw his plea. On December 21, 2009, the trial court denied the motion without conducting an evidentiary hearing. On January 29, 2010, the court sentenced defendant on counts two and three to concurrent two-year terms of probation, and on count one to a one-year term of probation concurrent with the sentence imposed on counts two and three. The court also imposed all appropriate fines and penalties.

On appeal, defendant argues:

POINT I.

THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN REFUSING TO GRANT DEFENDANT-APPELLANT'S PRE-SENTENCE MOTION TO WITHDRAW HIS PLEA.

A. DEFENDANT-APPELLANT ASSERTED, AND CONTINUES TO ASSERT, A COLORABLE CLAIM OF INNOCENCE.

B. DEFENDANT-APPELLANT HAD COMPELLING REASONS FOR HIS REQUEST TO WITHDRAW HIS PLEA.

C. DEFENDANT-APPELLANT'S PLEA WAS NOT THE RESULT OF A [NEGOTIATION] WITH THE PROSECUTION.

D. THE STATE WOULD NOT HAVE [BEEN] UNFAIRLY PREJUDICED, NOR WOULD THE DEFENDANT-APPELLANT HAVE BEEN UNFAIRLY ADVANTAGED, HAD THE TRIAL COURT GRANTED THE MOTION TO WITHDRAW THE PLEA.

We reverse.

On February 15, 2008, an unknown male sought to obtain a store credit card from a Best Buy retail store in Paramus. In furtherance, the person proffered a fraudulent Pennsylvania automobile driver's license and a fraudulent VISA credit card identifying himself as Samuel Smith. Upon recognizing the documents as fraudulent, the store representative attempted to stall the man while the store manager telephoned the police. After becoming suspicious of the store representative's actions, the man fled without his original documents. The Paramus Police Department issued an electronic message to other law enforcement agencies requesting their assistance in identifying the suspect from a copy of the photograph contained on ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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