The New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division has affirmed the convictions and 42-year prison sentence of Jamel Carlton for a violent sexual assault against an Atlantic City casino-hotel housekeeper. The three-judge panel, consisting of Judges Sumners, Susswein and Perez Friscia, issued their decision on Dec. 19, 2024, following oral arguments in October and an initial ruling in November that required resubmission.
Carlton, who also goes by the aliases Jamel A. Carlton, Jamal Carlton, and Ghost J, was convicted by a jury on charges of aggravated sexual assault, sexual assault, aggravated assault, burglary, and criminal restraint. The crimes occurred at an Atlantic City casino-hotel where the victim worked as a housekeeper.
The prosecution's case relied heavily on multiple forms of evidence that painted a clear picture of the violent assault. Surveillance video recordings from numerous cameras throughout the casino-hotel captured Carlton's movements and actions. DNA evidence proved that Carlton sexually penetrated the victim, while photographic evidence documented the victim's injuries, corroborating her testimony that the encounter was violent and not consensual.
The trial judge sentenced Carlton as a persistent offender, resulting in the lengthy 42-year prison term. This designation indicates Carlton had prior criminal convictions that enhanced his sentencing under New Jersey's repeat offender statutes.
On appeal, Carlton raised a Confrontation Clause challenge for the first time, arguing that his constitutional rights were violated when the trial judge allowed the jury to hear lay opinion testimony regarding identification. The Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment guarantees criminal defendants the right to confront witnesses against them, including the right to cross-examine those who provide testimony.
However, the appellate court rejected this argument in an opinion written by Judge Susswein. The court's decision to uphold the convictions suggests that any identification testimony presented at trial met constitutional standards or that any potential error was harmless given the strength of other evidence.
The case originated in Atlantic County Superior Court under indictment number 20-12-0711, indicating the charges were filed in 2020. The lengthy timeline from indictment to final appellate decision reflects the complex nature of the case and the thoroughness of the legal proceedings.
Carlton was represented on appeal by Assistant Deputy Public Defender Michael Timothy Denny, who argued the case before the appellate panel. The Public Defender's Office, headed by Jennifer N. Sellitti, handled Carlton's representation throughout the appellate process. Carlton also filed a pro se supplemental brief, representing himself in addition to his appointed counsel.
The State was represented by Deputy Attorney General David M. Galemba, who argued the case for the prosecution. Attorney General Matthew J. Platkin's office handled the State's response, with Deputy Attorney General Mercedes Robertson contributing to the briefing.
The case record was impounded, a designation typically used in sensitive criminal matters to protect victim privacy and other confidential information. Despite this protection, the appellate court approved the opinion for publication in redacted form, allowing the legal precedent to be available while safeguarding sensitive details.
The decision required unusual procedural handling, with the court initially deciding the case on Nov. 27, 2024, then resubmitting it for a final decision on Dec. 19, 2024. This resubmission process suggests the court may have refined its analysis or addressed procedural concerns before issuing the final opinion.
The conviction and lengthy sentence reflect the serious nature of the charges and the impact on the victim, who was attacked while performing her duties at the casino-hotel. The use of surveillance video evidence demonstrates how modern security technology increasingly plays a crucial role in prosecuting violent crimes, particularly in casino environments where extensive camera systems are standard.
The DNA evidence proved particularly compelling in establishing Carlton's guilt, providing scientific confirmation of the sexual assault that corroborated the victim's testimony about the violent nature of the encounter. Combined with photographic evidence of injuries, the prosecution presented a comprehensive case that convinced the jury of Carlton's guilt on all charges.
The appellate court's affirmation of the convictions and sentence provides closure to a case that has worked its way through New Jersey's court system for several years. The decision also establishes precedent regarding identification testimony and Confrontation Clause challenges in similar cases.
For the victim, the appellate court's decision represents final judicial validation of her testimony and the trauma she endured. The 42-year sentence ensures Carlton will remain incarcerated well into the future, reflecting the severity of his crimes and his status as a repeat offender under New Jersey law.