STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. TRAMAINE MILLEDGE

 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-5674-03T45674-03T4

STATE OF NEW JERSEY,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

TRAMAINE MILLEDGE,

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________________________

 

Submitted November 29, 2005 - Decided

Before Judges Skillman and Payne.

On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Cumberland County, Indictment No. 03-04-0388.

Yvonne Smith Segars, Public Defender, attorney for appellant (Michael B. Jones, Assistant Deputy Public Defender, of counsel and on the brief).

Ronald J. Casella, Cumberland County Prosecutor, attorney for respondent (Elizabeth C. Vogelsong, Assistant Prosecutor, of counsel and on the brief).

PER CURIAM

A jury found defendant guilty of sexual assault, in violation of N.J.S.A. 2C:14-2c(4); and endangering the welfare of a child, in violation of N.J.S.A. 2C:24-4a. The trial court sentenced defendant to a ten-year term of imprisonment, with five years of parole ineligibility, for sexual assault. The court merged defendant's conviction for endangering the welfare of a child into his conviction for sexual assault.

On appeal, defendant presents the following arguments:

I. THE JUDGE FAILED TO CHARGE THE JURY ON THE SUBJECT OF IDENTIFICATION ALTHOUGH IT WAS A CRUCIAL ISSUE IN THE CASE. (Not Raised Below)

II. THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED WAS INSUFFICIENT TO PROVE PENETRATION AND, AS SUCH, THE VERDICT FOR SEXUAL ASSAULT MUST BE VACATED AND A VERDICT OF CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONTACT ENTERED.

III. DEFENDANT'S SENTENCE IS MANIFESTLY EXCESSIVE AND MUST ALSO BE REMANDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DICTATES OF STATE V. NATALE.

A. Defendant's sentence is manifestly excessive.

B. Defendant's sentence must be remanded.

Defendant's first two points are clearly without merit and do not warrant discussion. R. 2:11-3(e)(2). As the State concedes, defendant must be resentenced in conformity with State v. Natale, 184 N.J. 458 (2005). Since defendant must be resentenced, there is no need to consider his argument that the sentence is excessive.

 
Accordingly, we affirm defendant's conviction. We vacate defendant's sentence and remand for resentencing in conformity with Natale.

(continued)

(continued)

3

A-5674-03T4

RECORD IMPOUNDED

December 15, 2005