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. Fields

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division

December 18, 2013

STATE OF NEW JERSEY, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
MARK T. FIELDS, a/k/a JAMIE FIELDS, a/k/a JAMIE C. FIELDS, a/k/a MARK C. FIELDS, a/k/a MARK JENNINGS, a/k/a MARK T. LEWIS, a/k/a TROY LEWIS, Defendant-Appellant.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Submitted November 18, 2013

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Hudson County, Indictment Nos. 10-12-2131 and 11-01-0155.

Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, attorney for appellant (Sylvia M. Orenstein, Assistant Deputy Public Defender, on the brief).

Gaetano T. Gregory, Acting Hudson County Prosecutor, attorney for respondent (Tracey A. Agnew, Special Deputy Attorney General/Acting Assistant Prosecutor, on the brief).

Before Judges Parrillo and Guadagno.

PER CURIAM

Defendant Mark T. Fields appeals from the September 30, 2011 final judgment of conviction[1] entered after his negotiated guilty plea to third-degree possession of heroin with intent to distribute within 1000 feet of school property, N.J.S.A. 2C:35-7, and third-degree possession of heroin, N.J.S.A. 2C:35-10(a)(1). On appeal, he presents the following arguments: POINT ONE

THE JUDGE ERRED IN DENYING THE MOTION TO SUPPRESS BECAUSE THE POLICE LACKED PROBABLE CAUSE TO ARREST OR A REASONABLE, ARTICULABLE SUSPICION TO BELIEVE THAT THE DEFENDANT WAS ARMED AND DANGEROUS, SO THAT THE WARRANTLESS SEARCHES OF DEFENDANT'S POCKETS VIOLATED HIS FOURTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS.
A.NEITHER SEARCH CAN BE JUSTIFIED AS ONE INCIDENT TO AN ARREST.
B.NEITHER SEARCH CAN BE JUSTIFIED AS PART OF AN INVESTIGATIVE STOP.
POINT TWO
THE PAROLE BAR IMPOSED ON THE DEFENDANT SHOULD BE REMOVED OR THE MATTER SHOULD BE REMANDED FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE SENTENCE.

We have considered these arguments and affirm the denial of defendant's motion to suppress substantially for the reasons stated by Judge Joseph V. Isabella in his comprehensive written opinion of June 9, ...


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.