Preview:

a3825-03.opn.html

N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1(b)(1) (count one); third-degree aggravated assault, N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1(b)(2) (count two); third-degree possession of a knife with the purpose to use it unlawfully, N.J.S.A. 2C:39-4(d) (count three); and fourth-degree possession of a knife under circumstances not manifestly appropriate for lawful uses, N.J.S.A. 2C:39-5(d) (count four). On December 11, 2003, the jury acquitted defendant of the first three counts but convicted him on count four. ">

Original Wordprocessor Version
(NOTE: The status of this decision is Unpublished.) Original Wordprocessor Version

This case can also be found at *CITE_PENDING*. (NOTE: The status of this decision is unpublished.)
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-3825-03T43825-03T4 STATE OF NEW JERSEY, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. RUBEN ALMEIDA, Defendant-Appellant. ______________________________________________________________

Submitted January 11, 2006 - Decided February 7, 2006 Before Judges Wecker and Graves. On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Atlantic County, Ind. No. 01-04-0746A. Yvonne Smith Segars, Public Defender, attorney for appellant (Steven M. Gilson, Designated Counsel, of counsel and on the brief). Jeffrey S. Blitz, Atlantic County Prosecutor, attorney for respondent (Yasmeen Shihabi, Assistant County Prosecutor, of counsel and on the brief).

file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/Opinions/a3825-03.opn.html[4/20/2013 4:20:43 PM]

a3825-03.opn.html

PER CURIAM A four-count indictment charged defendant Ruben Almeida with second-degree aggravated assault, 50 N.J. 454, 458-59 (1967). "In assessing the sufficiency of the evidence, the relevant inquiry is whether 'any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.'" State v. Martin, 119 N.J. 2, 8 (1990) (quoting State v. Brown, 80 N.J. 587, 592 (1979)). On a motion for a judgment of acquittal, "the trial judge is not concerned with the worth, nature or extent (beyond a scintilla) of the evidence, but only with its existence, viewed most favorably to the State." State v. Kluber, 130 N.J. Super. 336, 342 (App. Div. 1974), certif. denied, 67 N.J. 72 (1975). The same standards are to be applied by a reviewing appellate tribunal. State v. Kittrell, 145 N.J. 112, 130 (1996). We are satisfied, based on our review of the record, that the trial court did not err in denying defendant's motion for a judgment of acquittal. The State submitted sufficient proofs to submit count four of the indictment to the jury, and the evidence was sufficient for a reasonable jury to find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that defendant possessed a knife under circumstances not appropriate for lawful use. See State v. Kelly, 118 N.J. 370, 386 (1990) ("Although self-defense involves a lawful use of a weapon, it does not justify the unlawful possession of the weapon under section 5d except when a person uses a weapon after arming himself or herself spontaneously to repel an immediate danger . . . .").

Affirmed. (continued) (continued) 6 A-3825-03T4 February 7, 2006 0x01 graphic

file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/Opinions/a3825-03.opn.html[4/20/2013 4:20:43 PM]

a3825-03.opn.html

This archive is a service of Rutgers School of Law - Camden. This archive is a service of Rutgers School of Law - Camden.

file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/Opinions/a3825-03.opn.html[4/20/2013 4:20:43 PM]



Download a3825-03.opn.pdf

New Jersey Law