STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. MAURICE R. GRIFFIN

 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-5685-03T45685-03T4

STATE OF NEW JERSEY,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

MAURICE R. GRIFFIN,

Defendant-Appellant.

_______________________________________________________________

 

Submitted November 15, 2005 - Decided

Before Judges Kestin and Lefelt.

On appeal from the Superior Court of New

Jersey, Law Division, Camden County,

Indictment No. 03-08-2849.

Yvonne Smith Segars, Public Defender,

attorney for appellant (Joan T. Buckley,

Designated Counsel, of counsel and on

the brief).

Vincent P. Sarubbi, Camden County

Prosecutor, attorney for respondent

(Roseann A. Finn, Assistant Prosecutor,

of counsel and on the brief).

PER CURIAM

Defendant Maurice Griffin robbed a convenience store at gun point. Though he fled after committing the crime, he was later arrested after four eye-witnesses identified him. Defendant subsequently confessed. A Camden County jury convicted defendant, and Judge Millenky imposed a ten year prison term, subject to the No Early Release Act, N.J.S.A. 2C:43-7.2, for first-degree armed robbery, N.J.S.A. 2C:15-1. Defendant appeals and raises the following two arguments: (1) "the trial court abused its discretion and committed reversible error by failing to tailor the identification charge so that the charge clarified the law in the context of key material facts"; and (2) "the trial court committed reversible error when it failed to downgrade the defendant's conviction [of first-degree armed robbery] to a second degree offense because the interests of justice would have been served and there were compelling circumstances." We have reviewed these arguments in light of the record and pertinent law and find them to be without merit. R. 2:11-3(e)(2).

Defendant did not object to the trial court's adequate jury instruction on identification. There was no possibility that an extended identification instruction could have changed the result of this trial. R. 2:10-2. Defendant's contrition, full apology, sincere spiritual beliefs, and young age did not convince Judge Millenky to reduce defendant's sentence below the minimum for a first-degree crime, and the judge was well within his discretion in so concluding. State v. Roth, 95 N.J. 334, 365-66 (1984). In our view, any further sentence reduction would unjustifiably degrade the seriousness and dangerousness of defendant's criminal conduct.

 
Affirmed.

Defendant also received a three year concurrent term for unlawful possession of a weapon. N.J.S.A. 2C:39-4(a). The judge merged defendant's convictions for two fourth-degree aggravated assaults and second-degree possession of a weapon for an unlawful purpose into the robbery conviction.

(continued)

(continued)

3

A-5685-03T4

December 6, 2005