SYLLABUS
(This syllabus is not part of the opinion of the Court. It has been prepared by the Office of the Clerk for the convenience of the reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Supreme Court. Please note that, in the interests of brevity, portions of any opinion may not have been summarized).
State of New Jersey v. Stanford Yough (A-67-10) (066950)
Argued September 27, 2011 -- Decided November 30, 2011
ALBIN, J., writing for a unanimous Court.
The Court considers whether the trial court erred in denying a motion for a mistrial after the victim of a robbery testified that he observed the perpetrator more times than he had indicated in his statement to the police.
According to his trial testimony, on October 10, 2005, at approximately 1:00 a.m., Cesar Alva entered a restaurant in Paterson and was approached by defendant Stanford Yough, who asked him for fifty cents. Alva replied that he did not have the change. After Alva paid for his order, defendant again approached him and asked for a dollar. Alva said that he did not have one, but placed fifty cents on a nearby shelf. Defendant took the change and went outside where he conferred with two other men while pointing at Alva. After picking up his order, Alva left the restaurant and walked toward his car. He had not gone more than twenty feet when defendant and his two cohorts knocked him down and began kicking and pummeling him. Defendant ordered the men to stop the assault and demanded that Alva turn over his wallet. Defendant rifled through the wallet, causing Alva’s money to spill to the ground. The three men collected the money, defendant returned Alva’s empty wallet, and the men left the scene.
Alva drove to another location and called the police. He reported the robbery and gave the officer a description of the perpetrator. A week later, Alva went to the police department where he looked through books of photographs. Alva selected defendant’s photograph, stating that he had “no doubt” he was the man who robbed him. Two days later, Alva gave a statement to a detective in which he confirmed his identification of defendant.