STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. EDDIE MARTIN (15-05-0838, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
A-4919-15T3
| N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. | Aug 9, 2017Background
- Defendant Eddie Martin was observed in a parking lot allegedly trying car doors; a 9-1-1 caller described a masked male in a gray hoodie.
- Police found Martin crouched between cars wearing gray clothing and carrying a white bag; a screwdriver was found in his pocket during a patdown.
- Victims reported smashed windows and missing items; the white jacket (with bloodstains) was found in Martin's bag and other stolen items were recovered from the patrol car and Martin's person.
- Surveillance from the building showed a person matching the dispatch description carrying a white bag; officers did not retain their in-car MVR recordings.
- Martin was convicted of burglary, theft, and possession of burglar's tools and sentenced to an aggregate five-year term with 2.5 years parole ineligibility.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of officer lay testimony about description match | Officer's factual description of what he perceived was permissible lay testimony | Whittaker improperly opined defendant matched suspect in violation of McLean | Testimony was permissible factual description under N.J.R.E. 701; no improper opinion on guilt |
| Failure to give adverse-inference charge for missing MVRs | No duty to preserve absent request; no proof recordings existed or were running | Missing MVRs warranted adverse inference under Dabas and discovery rules | No abuse of discretion: defendant never requested preservation, insufficient proof recordings existed or would be informative |
| Failure to give third-party guilt instruction | State: jury instructions on identification sufficed; defense could argue third-party guilt in summation | Martin argued a third party committed burglaries and trial judge should have given the instruction | No rational basis for third-party charge; evidence pointed to Martin (bag, stolen items); trial court did not err |
| Failure to sua sponte charge lesser-included offense (criminal trespass) | State: facts showed intent to steal supporting burglary | Martin argued trespass was a lesser-included offense warranting instruction | No request and record did not "clearly indicate" a trespass-only verdict; no plain-error relief |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. McLean, 205 N.J. 438 (2011) (limits and permits lay testimony based on sensory perception)
- State v. Dabas, 215 N.J. 114 (2013) (adverse-inference charge appropriate where State violated discovery by destroying key materials)
- State v. Denofa, 187 N.J. 24 (2006) (lesser-included offense instruction rules; when court must charge sua sponte)
- State v. Walker, 203 N.J. 73 (2010) (standard for third-party guilt instruction)
- Chambers v. Mississippi, 410 U.S. 284 (1973) (constitutional right to present third-party guilt evidence)
- State v. Jenkins, 178 N.J. 347 (2004) (jury may convict on lesser while acquitting on greater only if supported by evidence)