Opinion
DOCKET NO. A-2700-12T4
04-11-2014
STATE OF NEW JERSEY, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. EVERETT HOLLOWAY, Defendant-Appellant.
Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, attorney for appellant (Steven M. Gilson, Designated Counsel, on the brief). Joseph D. Coronato, Ocean County Prosecutor, attorney for respondent (Samuel Marzarella, Supervising Assistant Prosecutor, of counsel; Shiraz Deen, Law Clerk, on the brief).
RECORD IMPOUNDED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE
APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
Before Judges Grall and Nugent.
On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Ocean County, Indictment No. 07-12-2004.
Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, attorney for appellant (Steven M. Gilson, Designated Counsel, on the brief).
Joseph D. Coronato, Ocean County Prosecutor, attorney for respondent (Samuel Marzarella, Supervising Assistant Prosecutor, of counsel; Shiraz Deen, Law Clerk, on the brief). PER CURIAM
Defendant Everett Holloway appeals the order that denied without an evidentiary hearing his petition for post-conviction relief (PCR). We affirm.
A jury found defendant guilty of two counts of aggravated sexual assault and three related offenses that were merged when defendant was sentenced. The details of defendant's offenses are recounted thoroughly in our opinion affirming defendant's convictions on direct appeal, State v. Holloway, No. A-0464-09 (App. Div. September 29, 2011) (slip op. at 3-9), and need not be repeated here. In our opinion, although we affirmed defendant's convictions, we remanded for resentencing because the trial court had imposed two extended-term sentences in contravention of N.J.S.A. 2C:44-5(a)(2), which provides that "[n]ot more than one sentence for an extended term shall be imposed." The Supreme Court denied defendant's petition for certification. State v. Holloway, 210 N.J. 109 (2012). On remand, the court resentenced defendant on the second count of aggravated sexual assault to a twenty-year custodial term, subject to the No Early Release Act, N.J.S.A. 2C:43-7.2, to run concurrent with the life sentence the court had previously imposed on the first count of aggravated sexual assault.
The same year that the Supreme Court denied defendant's petition for certification, defendant filed a PCR petition. He alleged in the petition that his trial attorney was ineffective because the attorney had neither reviewed discovery with him nor investigated prospective witnesses. In an oral decision delivered from the bench on January 4, 2013, Judge Joseph L. Foster denied defendant's petition. Defendant appealed.
Defendant presents the following argument:
THIS MATTER MUST BE REMANDED FOR AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING BECAUSE DEFENDANT ESTABLISHED A PRIMA FACIE CASE OF TRIAL COUNSEL'S INEFFECTIVENESS FOR FAILING TO PROVIDE HIM WITH DISCOVERY AND FAILING TO INVESTIGATE PROSPECTIVE WITNESSES.
We affirm, substantially for the reasons explained by Judge Foster in his oral decision. Defendant's arguments are without sufficient merit to warrant further 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