HACKENSACK, N.J. – A Bergen County man, Sui Kam “Tony” Tung, is again appealing his conviction for the 2011 murder of Rob Cantor, the boyfriend of Tung’s estranged wife, following a retrial that ended in guilty verdicts on all counts.
A Bergen County grand jury initially indicted Tung in June 2013 on eleven charges, including murder, felony murder, burglary, aggravated arson, weapons offenses, desecration of human remains, and hindering apprehension. He was first tried in 2015 and convicted on eight counts, receiving a life sentence plus ten years, with 68.5 years of parole ineligibility.
In 2019, the Appellate Division reversed those convictions in State v. Tung, 460 N.J. Super. 75 (App. Div. 2019), and ordered a retrial. Upon remand, Judge Christopher R. Kazlau renumbered the remaining counts, and in June and July 2023, a new jury again convicted Tung on all eight counts. On November 3, 2023, Judge Kazlau sentenced Tung to life in prison, with 85 percent parole ineligibility under the No Early Release Act, along with standard fines and penalties. Tung filed his notice of appeal on December 15, 2023.
At trial, prosecutors alleged that Tung traveled from New York to Teaneck late on March 6, 2011, broke into Cantor’s home, shot him in the head, and set fire to the house in an attempt to cover up the crime. The body was discovered burned beyond recognition in the basement, and investigators recovered a .380 shell casing and bullet fragments.
The defense argued that the State presented only circumstantial evidence based on motive—Tung’s anger over his wife’s relationship with Cantor—and failed to prove he was in New Jersey at the time of the killing. No eyewitnesses saw him near the scene, and police found no fingerprints, DNA, or direct physical evidence linking him to the shooting or arson.
In its appeal, the defense contends that the trial court should have granted a judgment of acquittal because the prosecution’s case was “heavy on motive but devoid of proof of presence.” The appeal also challenges various evidentiary rulings and the sufficiency of the State’s forensic evidence, arguing the conviction cannot stand without direct proof connecting Tung to the crime scene.
The Appellate Division will now determine whether the retrial complied with due process and whether the evidence presented was legally sufficient to sustain Tung’s murder and related convictions.
