STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. RASHAWN BOND(10-03-0288, UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE), A-2317-14T3

Background

Union County grand jury indicted Bond and co-defendants on kidnapping, robbery, felony murder, weapon offenses, and arson.
Trial court severed Bond for trial from co-defendants after duress defense proffer; Bond convicted on kidnapping, robbery, felony murder, and receiving stolen property; other counts acquitted.
Sentencing: life with 85% NERA for felony murder; concurrent 30-year term for kidnapping; both with 85% parole ineligibility; JOC errant on some details acknowledged.
Appeal argued multiple trial errors including duress instruction, admission of prior statements, accomplice liability wording, Brunson sanitization, and sentencing issues.
Appellate Division affirmed convictions but remanded for resentencing and correction of JOC.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Duress instruction adequacy	Bond contends plain error in duress charge and lack of unified application to all counts.	Duress instruction improperly intertwined sufficiency determinations with defense existence and not clear for all counts.	No plain error; model charge adequate and clearly places burden on State.
Accomplice-liability ‘and/or’ phrasing	Gonzalez error potential due to and/or; jurors could convict improperly.	Phrase used appropriately with separate consideration per charge; no prejudice.	Not plain error; instruction合理 under the circumstances.
Prior consistent statements	State used prior statements to impeach credibility; defense sought to elicit consistent statements.	Rule 104/N.J.R.E. 607-803 precludes inadvertent admission; improper to bar prior consistency here.	Rulings proper; no reversible error; no express claim of recent fabrication.
Daniels-tailoring cross-examination	Prosecutor properly challenged tailoring; admissible cross-examination.	Cross-examination referenced trial attendance; improper under Daniels; curative instruction lacking.	Some improper reference found but not reversible; curative instruction not required given context.
Sentencing errors and aggravating factors	Aggregate factors supported by the record; no improper double counting.	Arson conviction improperly used; double counting; mitigating-factor consideration incomplete.	Remanded to resentence without aggravating factor two and without arson; JOC corrected; double counting cured by remand.

Key Cases Cited

State v. R.B., 183 N.J. 308 (2005) (model charges should be read to jury as a whole)
State v. Gonzalez, 444 N.J. Super. 62 (App. Div. 2016) (and/or ambiguity in accomplice instructions; limited certification scope)
State v. Daniels, 182 N.J. 1 (2004) (prosecutorial tailoring cross-examination and curative instructions)
State v. Brunson, 132 N.J. 377 (1993) (sanitization of prior similar weapons convictions)
State v. Feal, 194 N.J. 293 (2008) (limits on reference to defendant's trial attendance; Daniels rule)
State v. Rogers, 236 N.J. Super. 378 (App. Div. 1989) (opening the door doctrine; probative value vs prejudice)
State v. Miller, 205 N.J. 109 (2011) (accomplice liability instruction requires separate consideration per charge)
State v. Olivio, 123 N.J. 550 (1991) (jury follow-up on accomplice status per charge)
State v. Yarbough, 100 N.J. 627 (1985) (prohibition on double-counting aggravating factors)