The unanimous New Jersey Supreme Court concluded with the following in relevant part: The State argues that the additional “conspiracy” language was merely superfluous and did not amplify the meaning of the charge or the jury instruction — essentially “a stutter in which the word . . . conspiracy was repeated twice, rather than once.” Moreover, the State argues, because promoting is a conspiratorial offense any additional mention of conspiracy regarding a predicate simply refers to the ongoing nature of the conspiracy.
That argument fails because the State asks that we presume the jury skipped over or ignored relevant, synonymous words in the jury instruction. “A charge is a road map to guide the jury, and without an appropriate charge a jury can take a wrong turn in its deliberations. The court must explain the controlling legal principles and the questions the jury is to decide.” Das v. Thani (2002) (alteration and omission in original) (quoting State v. Martin (1990)). One of the foundations of our jury system is the presumption that jurors listen to and are guided by the court’s instructions as they judge the facts of a case to determine guilt. State v. Bey (1988) (recognizing “the general presumption that jurors act in good faith and seek to comply with the court’s instructions”). Words that inform a juror’s understanding of the elements of an offense cannot be meaningless. Here, the court’s words — that the State must prove “that the purpose of the conspiracy was to commit the crime of conspiracy to commit murder and/or aggravated assault and/or conspiracy to distribute a controlled dangerous substance” (emphases added) — erroneously opened to the jury the possibility of convicting defendant for conspiracy to conspire to distribute CDS, a crime that does not exist because conspiracy to distribute CDS is not a predicate offense under the promoting statute.
Drug possession and distribution charges are often amended to conspiracies to possess or distribute as part of a plea agreement. The amendment to a conspiracy charge provides benefits to the defendant. One benefit is that they do not have to pay the additional fines that only apply to drug offenses. Another benefit is that a conspiracy conviction is not a predicate for an extended term if they are convicted of a subsequent drug distribution or possession with the intent to distribute a controlled substance.
