NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court ." Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R. 1:36-3. SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-0862-18 STATE OF NEW JERSEY, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. ROBERT CARDELL, a/k/a ROBERT J. CARDELL, Defendant-Appellant. Submitted January 13, 2021 – Decided April 27, 2021 Before Judges Alvarez and Mitterhoff. On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Ocean County, Indictment No. 17-07-1067. Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, attorney for appellant (John P. Flynn, Assistant Deputy Public Defender, of counsel and on the briefs). Bradley D. Billhimer, Ocean County Prosecutor, attorney for respondent (Samuel Marzarella, Chief Appellate Attorney, of counsel; William Kyle Meighan, Senior Assistant Prosecutor, on the brief). PER CURIAM Tried by a jury, defendant Robert J. Cardell was convicted of eight counts of fourth-degree unregistered home improvement contracting, N.J.S.A. 56:8- 138(a) (counts one, three, five, seven, fifteen, nineteen, twenty-two, and twenty- six), and eight counts of third-degree theft by deception, N.J.S.A. 2C:20-4 (counts two, four, six, eight, sixteen, twenty, twenty-three, and twenty-seven).1 Defendant was also charged in count twenty-eight with third-degree failure to file a tax return, N.J.S.A. 54:52-8, and in count twenty-nine with third-degree failure to pay taxes, N.J.S.A. 54:52-9(a). The latter two charges were severed before trial and resolved by plea agreement. Count twenty-eight was dismissed, and defendant entered a guilty plea to count twenty-nine. On August 31, 2018,2 defendant was sentenced on the State's motion to an extended term on count eight to nine years, subject to four years of parole ineligibility. See N.J.S.A. 2C:44-3(a). On count twenty-nine, defendant was sentenced to five years imprisonment concurrent to the other offenses. On the remaining charges, the judge sentenced defendant to concurrent eighteen months 1 An additional eleven counts involving six other victims were dismissed pre- trial by the State. 2 Defendant was sentenced on that date to concurrent and consecutive terms on unrelated indictments as well. A-0862-18 2 on all fourth-degree offenses, and concurrent five years on all third-degree crimes. We affirm. The charges arose from defendant's solicitation of eight victims between September 2016, and May 2017. Going door-to-door, he presented himself as a home improvements contractor who also performed roof repairs, replaced siding, and repaired gutters and driveways. He was not registered with the Division of Consumer Affairs. Defendant showed some of the victims documents purporting to be proof of insurance. He gave his company name as "Silverlining," based at a Salem address. Three of the victims resided in adult communities. Defendant obtained deposits, in the form of cash and checks, totaling $12,073 from the victims. In all but two cases, where he performed minimal preliminary tasks, he did not provide the agreed-upon services. Despite promising several victims a refund, defendant only partially refunded one victim. He told two victims that he could not …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals