Case ID: nj-super_115/html/0346-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. ELTON C. PIERCE, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
    Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division
    Submitted June 14, 1971
    Decided June 28, 1971.
    
      Before Judges Conford, Kolovsky and Carton.
    
      Mr. Stanley C. Van Ness, Public Defender, attorney for appellant (Mr. Edward Weisslitz, Assistant Deputy Public Defender, of counsel and on the brief).
    
      Mr. Joseph Tuso, Cumberland County Prosecutor, attorney for respondent (Mr. Samuel J. Serata, Assistant Prosecutor, of counsel and on the brief).
   Per Curiam.

This second post-conviction application based primarily upon alleged exeessiveness of sentence was barred since a prior post-conviction application on the same ground was determined adversely to defendant and not appealed. B. 3:22 — 3; 3 :22-5. Moreover, alleged excessiveness of sentence is not an appropriate ground of post-conviction relief, but only a ground for direct appeal from the conviction unless the sentence is “in excess of or otherwise not in accordance with the sentence authorized by law”. B. 3:22-2. This is not such a case.

There is no merit in the additional claim of absence of speedy trial.

Affirmed.