From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Alvarado

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION
Oct 31, 2018
DOCKET NO. A-3691-16T2 (App. Div. Oct. 31, 2018)

Opinion

DOCKET NO. A-3691-16T2

10-31-2018

STATE OF NEW JERSEY, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. VICTOR ALVARADO, Defendant-Appellant.

Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, attorney for appellant (Abby P. Schwartz, Designated Counsel, on the brief). Michael A. Monahan, Acting Union County Prosecutor, attorney for respondent (James C. Brady, Special Deputy Attorney General/Acting Assistant Prosecutor, of counsel and on the brief).


NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION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. Before Judges Nugent and Reisner On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Union County, Accusation Nos. 15-01-0062 and No. 15-01-0063. Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, attorney for appellant (Abby P. Schwartz, Designated Counsel, on the brief). Michael A. Monahan, Acting Union County Prosecutor, attorney for respondent (James C. Brady, Special Deputy Attorney General/Acting Assistant Prosecutor, of counsel and on the brief). PER CURIAM

Defendant Victor Alvarado appeals from a January 23, 2017 order denying his petition for post-conviction relief (PCR). We affirm.

Defendant pled guilty to third-degree possession of heroin with intent to distribute in a school zone, N.J.S.A. 2C:35-7, for which an extended term was mandatory due to his prior criminal record. He also pled guilty to third-degree possession with intent to distribute, N.J.S.A. 2C:35-5(b)(3). Consistent with the plea agreement, Judge Regina C. Caulfield sentenced defendant to six years in prison with a three-year parole bar, and a concurrent term of five years with a two and one-half year parole bar. We affirmed the sentence on an Excessive Sentence calendar. State v. Alvarado, No. A-005128-14 (App. Div. Dec. 15, 2015).

Defendant then filed a PCR petition, seeking to re-argue the sentence, and contending that his trial and appellate attorneys were ineffective in failing to argue additional mitigating factors. In a lengthy oral opinion, Judge Caulfield carefully addressed the merits of defendant's arguments, even though they were likely barred because they were or could have been raised on direct appeal. See R. 3:22-4; R. 3:22-5. Notably, the judge found that none of defendant's asserted mitigating factors were supported by the record, and defense counsel was not ineffective in failing to assert non-meritorious arguments. Judge Caulfield also found that, even if she accepted and considered all of defendant's current sentencing arguments, she would impose the same sentence due to the preponderance of aggravating factors.

On this appeal, defendant raises one point of argument:

DUE TO INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL, DEFENDANT RECEIVED AN IMPROPER SENTENCE, IN VIOLATION OF HIS RIGHT TO COUNSEL AND A FAIR TRIAL.

After reviewing the record, we conclude that Judge Caulfield thoroughly addressed defendant's contentions, and the arguments are without sufficient merit to warrant further discussion here. R. 2:11-3(e)(2). We affirm for the reasons stated in Judge Caulfield's opinion.

Affirmed. I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the original on file in my office.

CLERK OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION


Summaries of

State v. Alvarado

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION
Oct 31, 2018
DOCKET NO. A-3691-16T2 (App. Div. Oct. 31, 2018)
Case details for

State v. Alvarado

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF NEW JERSEY, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. VICTOR ALVARADO…

Court:SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION

Date published: Oct 31, 2018

Citations

DOCKET NO. A-3691-16T2 (App. Div. Oct. 31, 2018)