State v. James W. Robinson (070556), 217 N.J. 594

In Dec 2003 and Jan 2004 Robinson sold crack and police executed a warrant on his apartment; he was convicted on multiple drug counts.
Robinson had a significant criminal history including a 1994 drug conviction (predicate for repeat‑drug mandatory extended term) and was incarcerated on a 2002 conviction at sentencing.
Trial court merged counts and imposed two mandatory extended terms under N.J.S.A. 2C:43‑6(f): 15 years (with 5 years parole ineligibility) on one count and a concurrent 7 years (3 years parole ineligibility) on the other.
After appeal and a post‑conviction motion, the trial court — on the State’s concession that one count was not a predicate for mandatory enhancement — converted one mandatory term into a discretionary persistent‑offender extended term, leaving the other mandatory term in place; aggregate exposure unchanged.
Appellate Division affirmed, holding N.J.S.A. 2C:44‑5(a)(2) bars multiple discretionary extended terms but does not bar pairing a mandatory and a discretionary extended term in the same sentencing proceeding.
Supreme Court granted certification to decide whether a mandatory extended term and a discretionary extended term may be imposed in the same sentencing proceeding and to determine the proper remedy.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether N.J.S.A. 2C:44‑5(a)(2) permits imposing a mandatory extended term and a discretionary extended term in the same sentencing proceeding	State: statute bars multiple discretionary terms only; a mandatory term may coexist with a discretionary one; prosecutor can waive mandatory to seek discretionary	Robinson: plain language prohibits more than one extended‑term sentence in a single proceeding, so pairing mandatory + discretionary is barred	Court: Held N.J.S.A. 2C:44‑5(a)(2) unambiguously bars imposing more than one extended term in a single sentencing proceeding, including a mandatory + discretionary pairing.
Remedy when an illegal sentence includes both types of extended terms	State: remand for full resentencing so prosecutor can choose which extended term to pursue (may waive mandatory)	Robinson: simply vacate the discretionary extended term and keep the valid mandatory term	Court: Vacated sentence; remanded for a new, full sentencing proceeding allowing State to elect which extended term to seek; full resentencing required with written request and findings.

State v. Hudson, 209 N.J. 513 (2012) (interpreting N.J.S.A. 2C:44‑5 and stating that subsection (a)(2) unambiguously limits extended terms in a single sentencing proceeding)
State v. Lagares, 127 N.J. 20 (1992) (explaining prosecutor’s role in requesting mandatory repeat‑drug extended terms)
State v. Martin, 110 N.J. 10 (1988) (distinguishing discretionary and mandatory extended terms)
State v. Thomas, 195 N.J. 431 (2008) (notice requirements and sentencing analysis for extended terms)
State v. Pierce, 188 N.J. 155 (2006) (discussing discretionary extended term authority)
State v. Robinson, 200 N.J. 1 (2009) (prior Supreme Court decision reinstating convictions; factual background)