State v. Hicks
| Decision Date | 07 July 1969 |
| Citation | 54 N.J. 390,255 A.2d 264 |
| Parties | STATE of New Jersey, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Alfred HICKS, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Rudolph J. Rossetti, Asst. Prosecutor, for respondent (A. Donald Bigley, Camden County Prosecutor, attorney).
Charles Lee Harp, Jr., Camden, for appellant.
Defendant appeals, by leave of this Court, from the denial of his petition for post conviction relief. He alleges that his sentence of 20 to 25 years was excessive.
Defendant, Alfred Hicks, together with Lester Gardner, was indicted for the murder of Richard Lukasiak. Defendant pleaded non vult on May 2, 1966. On May 10, 1966, after a trial in which Hicks testified as a witness for Gardner, the latter was found guilty of second degree murder. On May 23, 1966 Gardner was sentenced to 25 to 30 years and Hicks to 20 to 25 years. However, Gardner's conviction was reversed on appeal and his case remanded for retrial. State v. Gardner, 51 N.J. 444, 242 A.2d 1 (1968). On remand, the murder indictment against Gardner was dismissed upon his plea of guilty to an accusation of manslaughter. On March 14, 1968, a six to eight year sentence was imposed on him.
We recognize that a sentence of one defendant not otherwise excessive is not erroneous merely because a co-defendant's sentence is lighter. State v. Gentile, 41 N.J. 58, 194 A.2d 487 (1963); State v. Tyson, 43 N.J. 411, 204 A.2d 864 (1964). However, grievous inequities in sentences destroy a prisoner's sense of having been justly dealt with, as well as the public's confidence in the even-handed justice of our system.
Although the term imposed upon Hicks was within the statutory limits for the offense involved, under the peculiar facts here present, including: the fact that Gardner's original sentence exceeded Hicks' the acceptance of Gardner's manslaughter plea with the acquiescence of the Prosecutor and his sentence of six to eight years by a judge other than the original sentencing judge and, who interposed a fresh analysis of the facts surrounding the homicide; an independent re-examination by this Court of the evidence of the Gardner trial with an eye to the contribution of Gardner and Hicks to the argument which culminated in the homicide, which examination disclosed that the incident which gave rise to the homicide, had its inception in a belligerent, provocative, racial and personal slur by the deceased to Gardner, a much smaller and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Roach
...at 379, 471 A.2d 389 (citation omitted). Disparity may invalidate an otherwise sound and lawful sentence. See, e.g., State v. Hicks, 54 N.J. 390, 392, 255 A.2d 264 (1969) (reducing defendant's sentence to that imposed on codefendant whose participation in the homicide was greater than defen......
- State v. Thomas
-
State v. Roth
...the statutory maximum, were found to be excessive. See, e.g., State v. Leggeadrini, 75 N.J. 150, 380 A.2d 1112 (1977); State v. Hicks, 54 N.J. 390, 255 A.2d 264 (1969); State v. Bess, 53 N.J. 10, 247 A.2d 669 (1968). A State appeal that seeks to increase a defendant's sentence presents othe......
-
State v. Montague
... ... at 489, 244 A.2d at 703. But the mere fact that the statutory limit grossly exceeds the sentence is by no means dispositive on appeal. Cf. State v. Hicks, 54 N.J. 390, 392, 255 A.2d 264 (1969); State v. Bess, 53 N.J. 10, 18, 247 A.2d 669, (1968). The defendant had no prior involvement with the law and the imposition at trial of lesser imprisonment might well have suitably served all interests concerned. However we need not pursue the matter since ... ...
-
More Property Rules Than Property? the Right to Exclude in Patent and Copyright
...value of the improvement and retaining the land. See, e.g., Somerville v. Jacobs, 170 S.E.2d 805, 813 (W. Va. 1969).74. See Mannillo, 255 A.2d at 264. One might observe that property law operates as a strict liability regime when it requires the unwitting encroacher to pay: the defendant is......