WAS SHOW [SIC]. (Not Raised Below).
United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218 (1967). A-3711-18 POINT II
TRIAL COUNSEL'S FAILURE TO COMMUNICATE CRUCIAL FACTS OF THE CASE WITH DEFENDANT AND THE JURY CAUSED [DEFENDANT] SUBSTANTIAL PREJUDICED AND INJURIOUS EFFECTS ON THE JURY'S VERDICT AND THE OUTCOME OF THE TRIAL. (Not Raised Below).
A.) COUNSEL FAILED TO INVESTIGATE READY [SIC] AVAILABLE FACTS OF THE CASE TO PREPARE AN "ACTUAL INNOCENCE" DEFENSE CLAIM ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT DEPRIVED HIM OF A FAIR TRIAL. (Not Raised Below).
B.) FAILURE TO SUBJECT THE STATE'S CASE TO A MEANINGFUL ADVERSARY CHALLENGE TEST TO VALIDATE THE WORTHINESS OF MR. HERNANDEZ'S FALSE TESTIMONY DURING THE TRIAL FALLS FAR BELOW WHAT A REASONABLE, COMPETENT AND HONEST ATTORNEY WOULD HAVE DONE UNDER THE SAME CIRCUMSTANCES. (Not Raised Below).
C.) COUNSEL'S FAILURE TO FILE A MOTION TO SUPPRESS MR. HERNANDEZ'S PERJURED TESTIMONY IN FRONT OF THE JURY, WHICH BY DESIGN WAS TO DELIVERATELY DECEIT [SIC] THE JURORS AND ALLOWED TO GO ON
A-3711-18 UNMOLESTED, UNCORRECTED, AND UNCHALLENGED CONSTITUTED A VIOLATION OF THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE AND THE RIGHT TO HAVE A FAIR TRIAL. (Not Raised Below).
D.) A VIOLATION OF THE [U.S. CONST., AMENDS V, VI AND IV] AMENDMENTS GUARANTEED RIGHTS TO PROVIDED BY THE [N.J. CONST., ART. 1, ¶¶ 1 AND 10], PURSUANT TO N.J.S.A. 10:6-2e. (Not Raised Below).
E.) COUNSEL'S FAILURE TO FILE A MOTION FOR ACQUITTAL AFTER THE STATE[']S CASE HAD CLOSED UNDER R. 3:18-2, REQUIRES THE CONVICTION TO BE VACATED. (Not Raised Below).
We affirm the order of the Criminal Part because defendant has not
provided any basis to satisfy the standard for filing a second PCR petiti on as
codified in Rule 3:22-12(a)(2). Although the Criminal Part judge based her
ruling on different legal grounds, it is a long-settled principle of appellate
jurisprudence that "an appeal is taken from a trial court's ruling rather than
reasons for the ruling." State v. Adubato, 420 N.J. Super. 167, 176 (App. Div.
2011).
Affirmed.
A-3711-18