State v. Watson
| Citation | 444 A.2d 603,183 N.J.Super. 481 |
| Parties | STATE of New Jersey, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Johnny WATSON, Defendant-Respondent. |
| Decision Date | 17 March 1982 |
| Court | New Jersey Superior Court – Appellate Division |
Hilary L. Brunell, Asst. Essex County Prosecutor, for plaintiff-appellant .
Susan T. Sinins, Asst. Deputy Public Defender, for defendant-respondent (Stanley C. Van Ness, Public Defender, attorney; Susan T. Sinins, of counsel and on the brief).
Before Judges MICHELS, McELROY and J. H. COLEMAN.
The opinion of the court was delivered by
MICHELS, P. J. A. D.
The State appeals pursuant to the provisions of N.J.S.A. 2C:44-1 f(2) of the New Jersey Code of Criminal Justice from a judgment of the Law Division wherein concurrent probationary terms and a fine of $1,500 were imposed upon defendant Johnny Watson for his convictions for sexual assault ( N.J.S.A. 2C:14-2 c(1)) and kidnapping to facilitate the commission of such sexual assault ( N.J.S.A. 2C:13-1 b(1)). The State contends that the imposition of noncustodial sentences in the circumstances of this case constituted a manifest abuse of discretion by the trial judge and urges us to reverse the sentences and impose the presumptive terms of imprisonment provided by N.J.S.A. 2C:44-1 f(1).
While we are satisfied from our study of the record and consideration of all of the pertinent factors, particularly the heinous nature of the crimes and the circumstances attendant to their commission, that the trial judge mistakenly exercised his discretion by imposing probationary sentences upon defendant, we lack the power to change them. The State failed to appeal from the sentences within the time provided by statute, and we therefore do not have jurisdiction over this matter.
The right of the State to appeal a probationary sentence imposed upon a defendant for a conviction of a first or second degree crime, such as kidnapping and sexual assault, is purely statutory. N.J.S.A. 2C:44-1 f(2) (L. 1978, c. 95; N.J.S.A. 2C:44-1; amended by L. 1979, c. 178, § 93), which became effective on September 1, 1979, provides:
In cases of convictions for crimes of the first or second degree where the court is clearly convinced that the mitigating factors substantially outweigh the aggravating factors and where the interest of justice demands, the court may sentence the defendant to a term appropriate to a crime of one degree lower than that of the crime for which he was convicted. If the court does impose sentence pursuant to this paragraph, or if the court imposes a non-custodial or probationary sentence upon conviction for a crime of the first or second degree, such sentence shall not become final for 10 days in order to permit the appeal of such sentence by the prosecution.
Under the clear and explicit language of the foregoing statute the State has ten days within which to appeal from the imposition of certain sentences. The record shows that on May 14, 1980, following a lengthy jury trial, defendant was convicted of sexual assault, a second degree crime, and kidnapping to facilitate the commission of the sexual assault, a first degree crime. On August 8, 1980 the trial judge sentenced defendant to three years probation for the sexual assault, and to a concurrent three-year probationary term and a fine of $1,500 for kidnapping to facilitate such assault. On August 8, 1980, following the imposition of the sentences, defendant reported to the Essex County Probation Department, signed a form setting forth the conditions of probation and was directed to report weekly to his probation supervisor. In accordance with such directions, defendant reported to his probation supervisor on August 12, August 19 and September 2, 1980. On the latter date defendant was told by his...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Haliski
...Sanders, 107 N.J. 609, 527 A.2d 442 (1987); State v. Williams, 203 N.J.Super. 513, 497 A.2d 550 (App.Div.1985); State v. Watson, 183 N.J.Super. 481, 444 A.2d 603 (App.Div.1982). In this context, the State is permitted to seek an increase in the A second example of a legislatively created pr......
-
State v. Roth
...absent express statutory authority. United States v. Sanges, 144 U.S. 310, 12 S.Ct. 609, 36 L.Ed. 445 (1892); State v. Watson, 183 N.J.Super. 481, 444 A.2d 603 (App.Div.1982). For a long time, then, statutory restrictions on government appeals made discussion of the constitutional question ......
-
State v. Cannon
...However, unless it has such explicit statutory authority, the State has no right to appeal in a criminal case. State v. Watson, 183 N.J.Super. 481, 483, 444 A.2d 603 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 91 N.J. 530, 453 A.2d 853 (1982), cited in State v. Roth, supra, 95 N.J. at 343, 471 A.2d 370. Wh......
-
State v. Sanders
...failure to perfect an appeal within the ten-day period will result in dismissal of the State's appeal. See State v. Watson, 183 N.J.Super. 481, 484, 444 A.2d 603 (App.Div.1982). Once the State has filed a notice of appeal, see R. 2:5-1, a defendant's sentence is subject to the continuing st......