Court Opinion

ID: 9946132
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-29 15:08:07.063631+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:25:27.425218
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE
                                APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
        This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court ." Although it is posted on the
     internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited . R. 1:36-3.

                                                         SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
                                                         APPELLATE DIVISION
                                                         DOCKET NO. A-1952-22

STATE OF NEW JERSEY,

          Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

KEVIN A. IBANEZ,

     Defendant-Appellant.
_______________________

                   Submitted February 6, 2024 – Decided February 29, 2024

                   Before Judges Whipple and Paganelli.

                   On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law
                   Division, Bergen County, Municipal Appeal 22-25.

                   Levow DWI Law, attorneys for appellant (Evan M.
                   Levow, of counsel and on the brief, Keith George
                   Napolitano, Jr., on the brief).

                   Mark Musella, Bergen County Prosecutor, attorney for
                   respondent (K. Charles Deutsch, Assistant Prosecutor,
                   of counsel and on the brief).

PER CURIAM
      Defendant Kevin Ibanez appeals from the denial of his petition for post -

conviction relief (PCR). We affirm.

      In 2013, defendant pled guilty in Garfield Municipal Court to driving

while intoxicated (DWI), N.J.S.A. 39:4-50, and failure to report an accident,

N.J.S.A. 39:4-130. This was defendant's second DWI conviction. In exchange

for his guilty plea to the DWI charge, the State amended the charge of leaving

the scene of an accident involving property damage, N.J.S.A. 39:4-129(b), to

failure to report an accident, N.J.S.A. 39:4-130, and dismissed all other tickets.

In a plea hearing before the municipal court, defendant acknowledged he

understood he was pleading guilty to DWI; by pleading guilty, he was waiving

his right to trial (at which the State would have the burden of proving him

guilty); and, as defendant was a non-citizen, his guilty plea could impact his

efforts to become a United States citizen. Defendant also acknowledged he was

satisfied with his attorney's representation; his attorney answered all his

questions; and he had no questions of his attorney.

      Defendant admitted he was operating a vehicle on August 29, 2013,

having consumed alcohol prior to driving. He stipulated that a breathalyzer test

result showed his blood alcohol content was 0.15. The municipal judge accepted

defendant's guilty plea and sentenced him as a second-time offender to: a fine

                                                                            A-1952-22
                                        2
of $607; $33 in court costs; a $50 VCCB assessment; a $75 Safe Neighborhood

assessment; a $200 DWI assessment; a two-year license suspension; thirty-days

of community service; and two days in the Bergen County Jail or the Intoxicated

Driver's Resource Center. On the failure to report charge, the municipal court

imposed a fine and court costs. The court specifically advised defendant of

potential penalties if defendant was to be convicted of a third or subsequent

DWI. Defendant did not appeal.

      Eight years later, in June 2021, defendant was charged with a third DWI.

Because he then faced a mandatory 180-day jail sentence and an eight-year

license suspension, N.J.S.A. 39:4-50(a)(3), defendant filed a petition for PCR

from the 2013 DWI conviction in the municipal court, alleging he was unaware

of his constitutional rights when he pled guilty in 2013 and his plea to DWI

lacked a sufficient factual basis. Defendant asked the PCR court to vacate his

2013 guilty plea.

      Defendant's petition was untimely pursuant to Rule 7:10-2(b)(2), but he

contended his sentence and plea were illegal, thus asserting his petition was

timely under Rule 7:10-2(b)(a), which provides an illegal sentence can be

corrected at any time. He also asserted excusable neglect, contending he was

                                                                         A-1952-22
                                      3
never advised he had defenses to the 2013 DWI charge and was not properly

advised of his constitutional rights.

      The municipal judge denied defendant's petition.        Defendant sought

review in the Law Division. For reasons placed on the record, the PCR court

determined defendant's petition was time-barred; there is no fundamental

injustice even if defendant's assertions were found to be true; and there is no

allegation of ineffective assistance of counsel and no claim of actual innocence.

The PCR judge denied the relief sought. This appeal followed.

      On appeal defendant argues the following points.

            I. THE FACTUAL BASIS ASCERTAINED FOR THE
            PLEA WAS INSUFFICIENT TO SUSTAIN A
            FINDING OF GUILT.

            II. THE MOTION FOR [PCR] IS NOT TIME
            BARRED BECAUSE A SENTENCE WAS IMPOSED
            BASED ON AN INVALID AND ILLEGAL PLEA.

      We reject these arguments. "[PCR] is New Jersey's analogue to the federal

writ of habeas corpus." State v. Pierre, 223 N.J. 560, 576 (2015) (quoting State

v. Preciose, 129 N.J. 451, 459 (1992)). PCR provides "a built-in 'safeguard that

ensures that a defendant was not unjustly convicted.'" State v. Nash, 212 N.J.

518, 540 (2013) (quoting State v. McQuaid, 147 N.J. 464, 482 (1997)).

                                                                           A-1952-22
                                        4
      Rule 3:22-5 provides: "A prior adjudication upon the merits of any ground

for relief is conclusive whether made in the proceedings resulting in the

conviction or in any post-conviction proceeding brought pursuant to this rule or

prior to the adoption thereof, or in any appeal taken from such proceedings."

"[P]rior adjudication of an issue, including a decision on direct appeal, will

ordinarily bar a subsequent [PCR] hearing on the same basis."           State v.

Afanador, 151 N.J. 41, 51 (1997). However, the rule applies "only if the issue

raised is identical or substantially equivalent to that adjudicated previously on

direct appeal." State v. Marshall (Marshall IV), 173 N.J. 343, 351 (2002)

(quoting State v. Marshall (Marshall III), 148 N.J. 89, 150 (1997)).

      No petition for PCR can be filed more than five years after the date of

entry of the judgment of conviction being challenged, unless the petition

"alleges facts showing that the delay beyond said time was due to defendant's

excusable neglect" and shows that, if the facts are found to be true, "there is a

reasonable probability that . . . enforcement of the time bar would result in a

fundamental injustice." R. 3:22-12(a)(1). The rule serves the two important

interests of (1) preventing prejudice to the State's case as memories fade,

witnesses become unavailable, and evidence is lost; and (2) respecting the

finality of judgment so as to "allay the uncertainty associated with an unlimited

                                                                           A-1952-22
                                       5
possibility of relitigation" and prompt "those believing they have grounds for

[PCR] to bring their claims swiftly . . . ." State v. Mitchell, 126 N.J. 565, 575-

76 (1992).

      Nevertheless, the five-year procedural bar is not absolute. State v. Milne,

178 N.J. 486, 492 (2004). It may be relaxed if the defendant shows the delay in

filing was due to excusable neglect or the interests of justice demand it. Ibid.

      "In the context of [PCR], a court should relax Rule 3:22-12's bar only

under exceptional circumstances."       Mitchell, 126 N.J. at 580.       Factors to

consider in determining whether there has been injustice warranting a relaxation

of the procedural bar include (1) "the extent and cause of the delay," (2) "the

prejudice to the State," and (3) "the importance of the petitioner's claim."

Afanador, 151 N.J. at 52. "Absent compelling, extenuating circumstances, the

burden to justify filing a petition after the five-year period will increase with the

extent of the delay." Ibid. To meet the burden, a petition must include "more

than a bare allegation." State v. Goodwin, 173 N.J. 583, 594 (2002). "The

petition itself must allege the facts relied on to support the claim." Mitchell,

126 N.J. at 577.

      Defendant's PCR petition was filed out of time. Defendant filed his

petition on March 31, 2022, well past the five-year deadline to address his 2013

                                                                               A-1952-22
                                         6
guilty plea and conviction for DWI and failure to report an accident. Defendant

demonstrated no excusable neglect which would justify relaxing the time bar.

      Moreover, defendant's assertion that his plea and resulting sentence were

illegal finds no support in the record. Defendant's answers during the plea

hearing belie any assertions he was inadequately informed of his rights or was

unaware of the consequences, as outlined by the PCR judge in his findings.

Defendant made no contemporaneous claim of innocence when he pled guilty

and does not do so now. Post-sentencing, an insufficient factual basis is no

longer enough to permit the withdrawal of a guilty plea; rather, the defendant

must establish the insufficiency raises some constitutional concern. Mitchell,

126 N.J. at 577.

      To the extent we have not addressed defendant's remaining arguments, we

are satisfied they are without sufficient merit to warrant further discussion in a

written opinion. R. 2:11-3(e)(2).

      Affirmed.

                                                                            A-1952-22
                                        7