Opinion
DOCKET NO. A-0947-14T3
07-18-2016
STATE OF NEW JERSEY, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. FORREST L. BOYER, Defendant-Appellant.
Forrest L. Boyer, appellant pro se. Mary Eva Colalillo, Camden County Prosecutor, attorney for respondent (Linda A. Shashoua, Assistant Prosecutor, of counsel and on the brief).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION Before Judges St. John and Guadagno. On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Camden County, Indictment No. 84-10-2732. Forrest L. Boyer, appellant pro se. Mary Eva Colalillo, Camden County Prosecutor, attorney for respondent (Linda A. Shashoua, Assistant Prosecutor, of counsel and on the brief). PER CURIAM
Defendant Forrest L. Boyer appeals the denial of a motion to correct an illegal sentence. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of felony murder, N.J.S.A. 2C:11-3a(3), and other related offenses arising out of an August 3, 1984 incident. We affirmed defendant's convictions and sentence on appeal. See State v. Boyer, 221 N.J. Super. 387 (App. Div. 1987), certif. denied, 110 N.J. 299 (1988). As we noted in our opinion:
He was sentenced to a term of life with a [thirty]-year parole ineligibility for the felony murder, to a consecutive [ten]-year term with a four-year period of parole ineligibility for the possession of the weapon for an unlawful purpose, and to concurrent five-year terms for each of the offenses of attempted distribution, terroristic threats and unlawful possession of a handgun. The armed robbery conviction was merged into the felony murder. Defendant's total sentence, therefore, was life plus [ten] years with a [thirty-four]-year period of parole ineligibility.
[Boyer, supra, 221 N.J. Super. at 391.]
In 1990, defendant filed a petition for post-conviction relief (PCR), which the Law Division denied. In 1997, defendant filed a second petition for PCR in the Law Division, which was also denied. In an unpublished opinion, we affirmed the denial, State v. Boyer, No. A-6263-97 (App. Div. June 13, 2000), certif. denied, 165 N.J. 605 (2000).
In 2001, defendant filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus, which was subsequently withdrawn and refiled as an all-inclusive petition. In 2003, the United States District Court dismissed defendant's petition as untimely. Boyer v. Hendricks, Civ. No. 01-4993 (JAP) (D.N.J. Oct. 22, 2003).
In February 2014, defendant filed a motion in the Law Division to correct an illegal sentence. On September 12, 2014, the Law Division denied defendant's motion in a comprehensive written opinion, finding that defendant's claims were "facially without merit." It is from that denial that defendant appeals.
On appeal, defendant presents the following issue for our consideration:
THE LAW DIVISION JUDGE ERRED BY DENYING THE MOTION TO CORRECT AN ILLEGAL SENTENCE WITHOUT ASSIGNING COUNSEL, WITHOUT REQUIRING A RESPONSE FROM THE STATE, AND WITHOUT GIVING A FULL LEGAL ANALYSIS TO THE ISSUE RAISED, WHEREFORE THE MATTER SHOULD BE REMANDED TO THE LAW DIVISION.
Having reviewed the record, we cannot agree with any of defendant's contentions. We conclude that defendant's arguments are without sufficient merit to warrant discussion in a written opinion. R. 2:11-3(e)(2). We add the following brief comment.
Under N.J.S.A. 2C:11-3b (amended by L. 1982, c. 111, § 1, effective August 6, 1982), existing at the time of the commission of the crime in August 1984, three alternative sentences for murder could be imposed: (1) death; (2) a sentence of thirty years without parole; or (3) a sentence between thirty years and life, with a thirty-year term of parole ineligibility. State v. Biegenwald, 96 N.J. 630, 635 (1984); State v. Martin, 213 N.J. Super. 426, 440 (App. Div. 1986), certif. granted, 108 N.J. 654 (1987); State v. Johnson, 206 N.J. Super. 341, 344 (App. Div. 1985), certif. denied, 104 N.J. 382 (1986).
The sentence defendant received on the felony murder charge, life in prison with a thirty-year period of parole ineligibility, was not illegal. "[A]n illegal sentence is one that 'exceeds the maximum penalty provided in the Code for a particular offense' or a sentence 'not imposed in accordance with law.'" State v. Acevedo, 205 N.J. 40, 45 (2011) (quoting State v. Murray, 162 N.J. 240, 247 (2000)).
Affirmed. I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the original on file in my office.
CLERK OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION