State v. Rangel

Summary

The New Jersey Supreme Court interpreted the phrase "aggravated assault on another" in N.J.S.A. 2C:14-2(a)(3), holding that "another" refers to a person other than the sexual-assault victim. The Court concluded that interpreting the phrase to include the victim would render the severe-personal-injury requirement in subsection (a)(6) redundant. It affirmed the dismissal of the aggravated-sexual-assault and attempted aggravated-sexual-assault convictions and remanded for resentencing on the remaining convictions.

Holdings

1. The phrase "on another" refers to a person other than the sexual-assault victim. It does not encompass an aggravated assault committed against the victim.
2. The aggravated-sexual-assault and attempted aggravated-sexual-assault convictions predicated on N.J.S.A. 2C:14-2(a)(3) cannot stand because the aggravated assault was directed at the sexual-assault victim rather than a third person.
3. The remaining convictions were not disturbed, but Rangel had to be resentenced on all remaining convictions, including the sexual-assault conviction that had previously merged into the dismissed aggravated-sexual-assault conviction.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the phrase "aggravated assault on another" in N.J.S.A. 2C:14-2(a)(3) refers to the sexual-assault victim, a third person, or both.
2. Whether Rangel could be convicted of aggravated sexual assault and attempted aggravated sexual assault under N.J.S.A. 2C:14-2(a)(3) when the aggravated assault was committed against the sexual-assault victim.
3. Whether the remaining convictions required resentencing after the aggravated-sexual-assault convictions were dismissed.

Disposition

affirmed