Supreme Court Clears Dennis Man Linked to 2009 Armed Robbery

TRENTON – Lack of direct DNA evidence in a June 2009 Wildwood Crest armed robbery led the state Supreme Court to uphold lower courts’ decisions that dismissed an indictment against a Dennis Township man. 
On June 19, the court rendered a decision in the Gary Twiggs’ case, and another unrelated case that used DNA to link an individual to a crime.
In the local case, a ski mask used by Dillon Tracy of Clermont, contained his hair, and the DNA in those strands proved that he had worn the mask during the crime. Police found the mask in a vehicle that was described by victims as one used in the commission of the robbery.
The court wrote, “In July 2014…Tracy later confessed, implicated Twiggs. Based on Tracy’s testimony, police arrested Twiggs for conspiracy and the robbery, and a grand jury returned an indictment.
“Twiggs moved to dismiss the indictment, arguing that the claim was barred by the general statute of limitations. The state responded that the DNA exception within (the law) tolled the statute of limitations. The trial court found the DNA-tolling provision inapplicable and dismissed the indictment. A divided panel of the Appellate Division affirmed.
“In Twiggs, the DNA-tolling exception does not apply. The state’s DNA evidence only tangentially connected Twiggs to the charged crime; its primary evidence against Twiggs was Tracy’s testimony. The statute of limitations tolled only against Tracy and expired on Twiggs’s charges. We find that the trial court correctly dismissed the indictment in Twiggs.”
The justices held that the DNA-tolling exception applies only when the state obtains DNA evidence that directly matches the defendant to physical evidence of a crime.
Further, the court noted that in Twiggs’ case, a grand jury indicted him based primarily on Tracy’s confession and his subsequent implication of Twiggs as a co-conspirator in the armed robbery.
“There exists no direct link between the DNA extracted from the physical evidence and Twiggs.
“Unless DNA evidence establishes a direct identification to the defendant charged, the mere existence of DNA evidence in a case cannot work to toll general statutes of limitations.
“In Twiggs’ case the DNA-tolling exception does not apply. The judgment of the Appellate Division affirming the trial court’s dismissal of the indictment against Twiggs is affirmed.”
A release from Wildwood Crest Police Department dated Sept. 19, 2014 announced that it had been notified by the New Jersey Department of Criminal Justice of a positive match through DNA of a possible suspect from the June 2009 armed robbery.