17 A.3d 256
N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div.2011Background
- Nguyen killed Tuan Thieu on the front lawn of Dynasty Restaurant in Green Brook on March 24, 2002, then fled to New York and was apprehended there.
- After arrest, police secured warrants in New Jersey for search of the residence and car used at the scene; the murder weapon was found in the roof of the Honda after returning the car to New Jersey.
- Nguyen was indicted April 24, 2002; extradition papers under the Uniform Criminal Extradition Act were pursued and he was brought to New Jersey on November 17, 2003.
- Defendant moved to dismiss the indictment as time-barred under the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD) and challenged the handgun evidence; these motions were denied.
- Nguyen pled guilty to aggravated manslaughter and attempted murder in 2009 pursuant to a plea bargain, with the State dismissing murder charges and recommending a 20-year cap, while serving concurrent New York sentences.
- The court ultimately held that custody was transferred under extradition and the IAD did not apply; the gun evidence suppression was denied as a technical NY statutory violation not implicating Fourth Amendment privacy rights.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether IAD applies to Nguyen's extradition from New York to New Jersey | Nguyen argues custody via IAD detainer governs speedy-trial | Custody transferred under Extradition Clause/UCEA, not IAD | IAD not applicable; extradition governs proceedings |
| Whether suppression of the handgun is required due to a NY statute/waiver in the search | Search violated NY 690.25 and warrant terms | Technical NY statute violation does not require suppression | No suppression; technical violation not affecting Fourth Amendment rights |
| Whether Nguyen is entitled to jail credits for time awaiting trial | Credit fully for NJ incarceration | Credit already allocated against NY sentences; request invalid | Denied; credits proper as ruled by NJ law |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Baker, 198 N.J. 189 (2009) (IAD detainer framework; custody transfer not detainer-based triggers)
- United States v. Mauro, 436 U.S. 340 (1978) (determinative distinction between detainers and habeas ad prosequendum)
- State v. Robbins, 124 N.J. 282 (1991) (extradition framework; IAD detainer not sole custody mechanism)
- State v. Evers, 175 N.J. 355 (2003) (search and seizure limits; statutory violations not always exclusionary)
- State v. Gadsden, 303 N.J. Super. 491 (App. Div. 1997) (statutory jurisdiction violations are technical; not automatically suppressive)