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 v. Ingram

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division

December 5, 2013

STATE OF NEW JERSEY, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
SELLERS INGRAM, a/k/a SELLERS INGRAM, III, and INGRAM SELLERS, Defendant-Appellant.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Argued October 9, 2013

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Atlantic County, Indictment No. 10-03-0691.

Jason A. Coe, Assistant Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for appellant (Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, attorney; Mr. Coe, of counsel and on the briefs).

Emily R. Anderson, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent (John J. Hoffman, Acting Attorney General, attorney; Ms. Anderson, of counsel and on the brief).

Appellant filed a pro se supplemental brief.

Before Judges Simonelli, Fasciale and Haas.

PER CURIAM

A jury found defendant Sellers Ingram guilty of first-degree aggravated manslaughter, N.J.S.A. 2C:11-4a, as a lesser-included offense of first-degree murder, N.J.S.A. 2C:11-3a(1) or (2) (count one); two counts of second-degree unlawful possession of a weapon, N.J.S.A. 2C:39-5b (counts two and five); second-degree possession of a weapon for an unlawful purpose, N.J.S.A. 2C:39-4a (count three); and third-degree receiving stolen property, N.J.S.A. 2C:20-7 (count seven). In a bifurcated proceeding, the trial judge found defendant guilty of two counts of second-degree certain persons not to have weapons, N.J.S.A. 2C:39-7 (counts four and six). The judge denied defendant's post-trial motions for a judgment of acquittal or a new trial, and imposed an aggregate fifty-eight year term of imprisonment with a forty-seven and one-half year period of parole ineligibility pursuant to the No Early Release Act (NERA), N.J.S.A. 2C:43-7.2. This appeal followed.

On appeal, defendant's assigned counsel raises the following arguments:

POINT I
ALLOWING THE VIDEO RECORDING OF [DEFENDANT'S] POST-ARREST INTERVIEW INTO THE JURY ROOM DURING DELIBERATIONS WAS STRUCTURAL ERROR BECAUSE IT DEPRIVED HIM OF HIS RIGHT TO BE PRESENT DURING A CRITICAL STAGE OF TRIAL. (Not raised below).
A. Allowing [Defendant's] Videotaped Statement Into The Jury Room Deprived Him Of His Right To Be Present At A Critical Stage Of Trial.
B. Allowing [Defendant's] Videotaped Statement Into The Jury Room Was Also Prejudicial Error Which Deprived Him Of A Fair Trial.
POINT II
THE STATE'S USE OF AUTOPSY PHOTOS AND BLOODY CLOTHING WAS UNDULY PREJUDICIAL AND DEPRIVED [DEFENDANT] OF HIS RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL.
POINT III
THE TRIAL COURT'S SENTENCE VIOLATED DOUBLE JEOPARDY PRINCIPLES AND IMPOSED CONSECUTIVE PRISON TERMS BASED ON A FLAWED YARBOUGH[1] ANALYSIS.
A. The Trial Court's Failure To Merge The Weapons-Related Offenses At Sentencing Violated Principles Of Double Jeopardy.
B. The Trial Court's Yarbough Analysis Was Flawed And Must Be Reconsidered In Light Of The Failure To ...

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.