Opinion
DOCKET NO. A-3418-13T2
01-19-2016
STATE OF NEW JERSEY, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. ANDRE D. DENNIS, Defendant-Appellant.
Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, attorney for appellant (Steven M. Gilson, Designated Counsel, on the brief). Christopher J. Gramiccioni, Acting Monmouth County Prosecutor, attorney for respondent (Monica do Outeiro, Special Deputy Attorney General/Acting Assistant Prosecutor, of counsel and on the brief).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION Before Judges Fisher and Currier. On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Monmouth County, Indictment No. 06-11-2533. Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, attorney for appellant (Steven M. Gilson, Designated Counsel, on the brief). Christopher J. Gramiccioni, Acting Monmouth County Prosecutor, attorney for respondent (Monica do Outeiro, Special Deputy Attorney General/Acting Assistant Prosecutor, of counsel and on the brief). Appellant filed a pro se supplemental brief. PER CURIAM
Defendant appeals the denial of his post-conviction relief (PCR) petition. We affirm.
Defendant was charged in 2006 and convicted by a jury in 2009 of first-degree armed robbery, first-degree felony murder, and other offenses. On June 5, 2009, Judge Anthony J. Mellaci, Jr., following the merger of some of the convictions, sentenced defendant on the felony murder conviction to life imprisonment subject to an eighty-five percent period of parole ineligibility pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2C:43-7.1. The judge also imposed a consecutive ten-year prison term on defendant's conviction for being a person not permitted to be in possession of a weapon, N.J.S.A. 2C:39-7(b)(1).
Defendant filed an appeal. We affirmed with a minor correction of the judgment, State v. Dennis, No. A-1052-09 (App. Div. Mar. 1, 2012), and the Supreme Court denied defendant's petition for certification, 211 N.J. 608 (2012).
On September 12, 2012, defendant filed a pro se PCR petition and counsel was appointed on his behalf. After hearing argument, Judge Mellaci denied the PCR petition for reasons expressed in his January 8, 2014 oral decision.
Defendant appeals, arguing through his attorney:
I. THIS MATTER MUST BE REMANDED FOR AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING BECAUSE DEFENDANT ESTABLISHED A PRIMA FACIE CLAIM OF PRETRIAL COUNSEL'S INEFFECTIVENESS FOR NOT ADVISING
HIM OF HIS RIGHT TO TESTIFY AT THE MIRANDA HEARING.In a brief filed on his own behalf, defendant also argues:
II. [TRIAL PCR] COUNSEL . . . FAILED TO ADEQUATELY PREPARE AND EXERCISE NORMAL CUSTOMARY SKILLS IN HIS PREPARATION OF THE DEFENDANTS['] (PCR [PETITION]), AND FAILED TO INVESTIGATE, PROPERLY PLEA[D] HIS PRO-SE ISSUES AND ALLOW HIM TO SUBMIT HIS PRO-SE BRIEF. IN VIOLATION OF RULE[] 3:22-6(d). AND HIS RIGHT TO EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL AND DUE PROCESS OF LAW AS GUARANTEED BY THE SIXTH AND THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION AND ARTICLE I[,] PARAGRAPH 10 OF THE NEW JERSEY STATE CONSTITUTION.We have renumbered these points.
III. DEFENDANTS['] [PCR] PETITION . . . SHOULD BE REMANDED FOR A NEW HEARING WITH THE INSTRUCTIONS TO THE TRIAL COURT TO ORDER THE OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER TO APPOINT NEW (PCR) COUNSEL WHO WILL FULFILL HIS OR HER OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE DEFENDANT WITH EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL. AS IS GUARANTEED HIM IN ACCORDANCE WITH NEW JERSEY COURT RULE, STATE AND FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONS AND DUE PROCESS OF LAW.
We reject Point I substantially for the reasons set forth by Judge Mellaci in his thorough oral decision of January 8, 2014, and we find insufficient merit in Points II and III to warrant discussion in a written opinion, R. 2:11-3(e)(2).
Affirmed. I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the original on file in my office.
CLERK OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S. Ct. 1602, 16 L. Ed. 2d 694 (1966).