Criminal Law Library Blog
These News Briefs and Decision Summaries are from the the New Jersey State Bar Association. They are an exclusive benefit of the Association in partnership with the New Jersey Law Journal. A subscription may be necessary to access the full text of some of the items listed:
NEWS BRIEFS:
Federal Judge Rejects DQ Motion Against State’s Connell Foley Attorneys
A federal judge has rejected a motion to remove Connell Foley as legal counsel for several state officials, like New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy and Attorney General Matthew Platkin, in a lawsuit alleging discrimination and racketeering.
NJSBA and Lowenstein Sandler Announce First-of-Its-Kind Partnership
The NJSBA and Lowenstein Sandler LLP are proud to announce an annual partnership that will unite the two organizations across a series of the NJSBA’s flagship events and initiatives. This collaboration starts at the Annual Meeting and Convention in May, and extend throughout the year to key programs such as the Mid-Year Meeting, the Diversity Summit and the AI Symposium. Read more here.
This Gives You Autonomy’: Lawyers Wanted for Boot Camp
Backers of a project to direct pro bono efforts at fighting climate change say you don’t have to be an environmental lawyer to make a difference.
NJSBA Celebrates Longtime Bankruptcy Judge Rosemary Gambardella
The NJSBA’s Bankruptcy Law Section celebrated the retirement of U.S. Bankruptcy Judge for the District of New Jersey Rosemary Gambardella on April 2 with hundreds from the legal community. View the photo album here.
We Are Very Concerned:’ Unfilled Judicial Seats Could Force Case Prioritization, AOC Warns
Less than a week into his new role as New Jersey’s top judge, Michael Blee appeared before the state Assembly to outline the judiciary’s top priorities and efforts to fill empty seats on the bench and ensure attorneys are assigned to familiar territory for pro bono work.
DECISION SUMMARIES:
Click on any decision below to get the full opinion
from the New Jersey Judiciary – April 9, 2025
APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION
There are no decisions approved for publication.
NOT APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION
CREDITORS’ AND DEBTORS’ RIGHTS
Wright v. Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co., Appellate Division, Per Curiam. Plaintiff appealed the denial of his motion to vacate a summary judgment order favoring defendant in his action challenging defendant’s interest, ownership, and standing to enforce a promissory note and mortgage. Plaintiff alleged excusable neglect under Rule 4:50-1(a) “because he mistakenly believed [defendant’s] summary judgment would be withdrawn ^because there was a pending motion to extend discovery.” Trial court noted plaintiff’s counsel was electronically notified when the motion to extend discovery was denied and received additional electronic notifications about defendant’s pending summary judgment motion and failed to respond. Trial court additionally found no meritorious defense since plaintiff did not engage in the discovery process. Plaintiff argued that the denial of his motion to vacate was erroneous. Court affirmed finding no abuse of discretion by the trial court because plaintiff failed to demonstrate excusable neglect or a meritorious defense.
CRIMINAL LAW
State v. Tucker, Appellate Division, Per Curiam. Defendant appealed the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing, following his guilty plea to multiple charges, including aggravated assault and burglary. The case involved a series of domestic violence incidents against the mother of defendant’s children, including physical assault and threats with a weapon, in violation of a no-contact order. An Essex County grand jury indicted defendant on ten counts, and he later entered a plea agreement, resulting in the dismissal of some charges and a recommended prison term. At sentencing, defendant expressed remorse and highlighted his community service, but the court focused on his criminal history and imposed an eight-year sentence with 85% parole ineligibility under the No Early Release Act. Defendant’s PCR petition claimed ineffective assistance of counsel, arguing that his attorney failed to secure testimony from character witnesses and did not adequately argue mitigating factors. The PCR court found no prima facie case of ineffective assistance, noting that the absence of witnesses did not affect the outcome, and that the plea bargain provided significant benefits. On appeal, defendant contended that the PCR court erred in denying an evidentiary hearing. The court emphasized that the absence of witnesses was not due to counsel’s fault and that the trial court had considered defendant’s community service. The court also found that counsel’s decision not to argue certain mitigating factors was a reasonable strategic choice, given defendant’s criminal history. The court concluded that defendant failed to demonstrate ineffective assistance and affirmed the denial of an evidentiary hearing.
CRIMINAL LAW
State v. S.B., Appellate Division, Per Curiam. Defendant appealed the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. Defendant, who had prior convictions for sexually assaulting teenagers, was designated an “excluded sex offender” under Megan’s Law, which prohibited his participation in youth-serving organizations. Despite this, he was involved with the Eternal Life Christian Center’s youth ministry, which provided activities for individuals aged 12 to 17. The parties disputed whether the youth ministry qualified as a “youth serving organization” under N.J.S.A. 2C:7-22 and whether defendant participated in it knowing that it qualified as a youth serving organization. The trial court convicting defendant for violating Megan’s Law, finding the youth ministry met the statutory definition and that defendant participated in it knowing that it was a youth serving organization. Defendant filed a PCR petition alleging that counsel was ineffective for failing to present evidence that the ministry’s lawyers advised him that he could participate in the ministry. The PCR court noted that defendant was informed of the statutory prohibitions on his participation in organizations that served youth but continued his involvement in the youth ministry. The PCR court found no merit in defendant’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, as he failed to demonstrate specific errors or prejudice. On appeal, the court upheld the PCR court’s decision, emphasizing that the delays in trial were due to the appellate process and that the defendant did not suffer prejudice from these delays. The court concluded that defendant’s arguments lacked merit and affirmed the denial of PCR.
CRIMINAL LAW
State v. Mego, Appellate Division, Per Curiam. Defendant appealed the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. Defendant pled guilty to first-degree aggravated manslaughter in 2015 and was sentenced to a 22-year prison term under the No Early Release Act. He did not appeal his conviction or sentence. In November 2021, defendant filed a PCR petition, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel because his attorney failed to file a direct appeal despite his request. Attorney contended defendant never made such a request. Defendant claimed he orally requested an appeal, but provided no documentation, and asserted he only realized an appeal had not been filed some time in 2021. PCR judge found attorney was credible and defendant’s claims incredible. PCR judge also noted that any appeal alleging sentencing disparity with his co-defendants would likely fail due to co-defendants’ cooperation with law enforcement. Defendant argued he had requested an appeal and there was insufficient evidence to contradict this. Court affirmed, adopting the trial court’s reasoning and deferring to its credibility determinations.
CRIMINAL LAW
State v. Junor, Appellate Division, Per Curiam. Defendant appealed his convictions and sentence on sexual assault and criminal restraint charges. Defendant drove victim to a beach and when she rejected his advances, tore her clothes off, inserted his finger in her vagina and drove over her ankle after she jumped out of the car. Defendant rejected State’s plea offer of eight years of imprisonment subject to the No Early Release Act. Jury convicted defendant and after the jury was dismissed, trial judge found defendant guilty of assault by auto. Sentencing court granted State’s motion to impose a discretionary extended term sentence because defendant was found to be a persistent offender under N.J.S.A. 2C:44-3(a). Defendant argued he was misinformed about his sentencing exposure during a pretrial conference, his sentence violated his due process rights and there was insufficient evidence for the criminal restraint charge. Court affirmed the convictions but vacated the sentence based on Erlinger v. United States, 602 U.S. 821, and remanded for new sentencing.