STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. LARRY CARDONAÂ Â (11-09-0940, UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE), A-1205-14T1

Defendant Larry Cardona was indicted for attempted murder (acquitted), aggravated assault, unlawful possession of a handgun, and possession of a weapon for an unlawful purpose; jury convicted on the latter three counts.
Police arrested Cardona, then went to his mother's Elizabeth home that night seeking the gun; his mother signed a Spanish consent-to-search form and officers thereafter searched his bedroom and seized bullets and gang-related items.
Cardona moved to suppress the bedroom search; the trial court credited the detective’s testimony that the mother knowingly and voluntarily consented and denied suppression.
The victim and an eyewitness gave prior recorded statements implicating Cardona; at trial both recanted or professed lack of memory. The trial court admitted their prior statements after N.J.R.E. 104 hearings under State v. Gross.
The jury convicted Cardona of aggravated assault and two weapons offenses; the court merged one weapons count, imposed a 10-year NERA term on aggravated assault and a consecutive 6-year term on unlawful possession (aggregate 16 years).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Cardona)	Held
Validity of bedroom search (consent)	Mother knowingly and voluntarily consented in Spanish; search lawful	Mother was confused, language-barrier, police began searching before she signed; consent not valid	Trial court credited detective; consent was voluntary; denial of suppression affirmed
Admissibility of prior recorded statements (Gross reliability)	Statements were reliable (recorded, interviewer testimony) and admissible to impeach recantation	Victim and witness were physically/mentally compromised or coerced; statements unreliable	Trial court found reliability by preponderance and feigned memory loss; admitted statements; ruling affirmed
Consecutive sentences (Yarbough factors)	Separate offenses, separate victims, and other Yarbough factors support consecutive terms	Consecutive punishment improper; society-as-victim rationale improper per Copling	Court gave multiple Yarbough-based reasons (separate offenses, timing, victim impact); consecutive sentence upheld
Aggravating factor one (heinous/cruel/depraved)	Facts (execution-style shooting, serious injury) support aggravating factor one as part of balancing	Conduct not sufficiently heinous to warrant factor one	Court found factor one but did not overweigh it; balanced with other factors; sentence affirmed

State v. Gross, 121 N.J. 1 (1990) (rules for admitting prior inconsistent statements and reliability inquiry)
State v. Yarbough, 100 N.J. 627 (1985) (factors for imposing consecutive sentences)
State v. Copling, 326 N.J. Super. 417 (App. Div. 1999) (criticized using ‘‘society’’ as separate victim to justify consecutive sentences)
State v. Megargel, 143 N.J. 484 (1996) (standard of appellate review of sentencing)
State v. Johnson, 42 N.J. 146 (1964) (deference to trial court credibility findings)
State v. Case, 220 N.J. 49 (2014) (sentencing discretion and reviewing principles)
State v. Randolph, 210 N.J. 330 (2012) (application of Yarbough and consecutive sentence review)
State v. Lawless, 214 N.J. 594 (2013) (scope of aggravating factor one analysis)