IMPORTANT PCR CASES TO KNOW

 

State v. McQuaid, 147 N.J. 464 (1977): Post-conviction relief “provides a defendant with a means to challenge the legality of a sentence or final judgment of conviction which could not have been raised on direct appeal.”

 

State v. Preciose, 129 N.J. 451, 460 (1992): Inefective assistance of counsel claims generally involve allegations and evidence outside the trial record and are "particularly suited for post conviction review because they often cannot reasonably be raised in a prior proceeding."

 

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 688 (1984): The Sixth Amendment right to counsel is viewed as the right to effective assistance of counsel and it ensures that the defendant has access to counsel's skill and knowledge necessary to afford him the  opportunity to meet the prosecution's case. To establish a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must satisfy the two-pronged Strickland test: 

               First, the defendant must show that counsel’s performance was deficient. This requires

          showing that counsel made errors so serious that counsel was not functioning as the “counsel”

          guaranteed the defendant by the Sixth Amendment. Second, the defendant must show that the

          deficient performance prejudiced the defense. This requires showing that counsel’s errors were

          so serious as to deprive the defendant a fair trial, a trial whose result is reliable. Unless a defendant

          makes both showings, it cannot be said that the conviction...resulted from a breakdown in the

          adversary process that renders the result unreliable.

 

State v. Fritz, 105 N.J. 42 (1987): Our Supreme Court adopted the Strickland test. See also State v. Pierre-Louis, 216 N.J. 577, 579 (2014), State v. Miller, 216 N.J. 40, 57-58 (2013) and State v. Porter, 216 N.J. 343, 352-53 (2013) reiterating the two-pronged test enunciated in Strickland and followed in Fritz. 

 

State v. Morrison, 215 N.J. Super. 540 (App. Div.), certif. denied, 107 N.J. 642 (1987): The Strickland test is also utilized for ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claims. 

 

State v. Taccetta, 351 N.J. Super. 196, 200 (App. Div.), certif. denied, 174 N.J. 544 (2002): This right to effective assistance of counsel applies to plea negotiations because plea bargaining is also a critical stage of a criminal proceeding to which this right to effective assistance of counsel attaches. 

 

Lafler v. Cooper, 132 S. Ct. 1376, 1387 (2012): This right to effective assistance of counsel also applies during the decision making process as to plea offer.

 

State v. DiFrisco, 137 N.J. 434, 457 (1994) cert. denied, 516 U.S. 1129, 116 S. Ct. 949, 133 L. Ed.2d 873 (1996): In the context of a plea, the second prong of the Strickland test focuses on whether counsel’s performance affected the outcome of the plea. That means defendant must establish that ‘”there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s errors he would not have pled guilty and would have insisted on going to trial.”’ Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 59, 106 S. Ct. 366, 370, 88 L. Ed.2d 203, 210 (1985)

 

State v. Buonadonna, 122 N.J. 22, 42 (1991): As a general rule, strategic miscalculations or trial mistakes are insufficient to warrant a reversal “except in those rare instances where they are of such magnitude as to thwart the fundamental guarantee of [a] fair trial [or plea].” State v. Dennis, 43 N.J. 418, 428 (1964).

 

State v. Hess, 207 N.J. 123, 145-47 (2011): The ineffective assistance of counsel claim can apply where a defendant received inadequate legal representation at sentencing.