RECORD IMPOUNDED NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court."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. SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-4461-19 STATE OF NEW JERSEY, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. CARDELL BOYD, Defendant-Appellant. _______________________ Submitted June 6, 2022 – Decided July 7, 2022 Before Judges Rothstadt and Natali. On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Camden County, Accusation No. 13-07-2228. Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, attorney for appellant (Marc R. Ruby, Designated Counsel, on the briefs). Grace C. MacAulay, Camden County Prosecutor, attorney for respondent (Jason Magid, Assistant Prosecutor, of counsel and on the brief). PER CURIAM This matter returns to us after a remand to the Law Division for an evidentiary hearing on defendant Cardell Boyd's petition for post-conviction relief (PCR). State v. Boyd, No. A-5372-17 (App. Div. Sept. 17, 2019). On remand, another PCR judge conducted an evidentiary hearing and denied PCR in an April 21, 2020 order and written opinion. On appeal, defendant renews his claims that his plea counsel provided ineffective representation, specifically arguing: POINT [I] THE PCR COURT IMPROPERLY REVERSED THE BURDEN OF PROOF AT THE EVIDENTIARY HEARING, AND ALLOWED THE STATE TO OUT- POSITION MR. BOYD BY PROCEEDING FIRST AND CALLING [DEFENDANT]'S COUNSEL TO THE STAND FOR FRIENDLY AND DIRECT EXAMINATION HOSTILE TO [DEFENDANT]'S APPLICATION THUS SABATOGING A PETITION WHICH SHOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED [1] POINT [II] THE PCR COURT COUNTENANCED [PLEA] COUNSEL'S UTTERLY ABYSMAL PERFORMANCE BY REACHING OUTSIDE THE RECORD, AND IMPROPERLY CREDITING COUNSEL'S PAST PERFORMANCES AND HELD THE EVIDENTIARY HEARING SCANT MOMENTS 1 We have reorganized defendant's point headings to reflect the order in which we discuss each issue in our opinion. A-4461-19 2 AFTER SENTENCING [DEFENDANT] IN AN UNRELATED MATTER AND BASING THE DENIAL OF PCR ON OBSERVATIONS MADE OF [DEFENDANT] FROM OTHER CASES THEREBY DENYING MR. BOYD A FAIR HEARING AND INSTEAD PROTECTING [DEFENDANT]'S UNRELATED CONVICTION AND SENTENCE JUST METED OUT BY THE PCR COURT Having considered the record developed at the evidentiary hearing, we disagree with all of defendant's arguments and affirm. I. We incorporate by reference the facts and procedural history set forth at length in our initial PCR opinion. See State v. Boyd, No. A-5372-17 (App. Div. Sept. 17, 2019) (slip op. at 2-8). We summarize certain of those facts, to provide context for the present appeal. After defendant pled guilty to an Accusation that charged him with third- degree endangering the welfare of a child, N.J.S.A. 2C:24-4(a), the court sentenced him in accordance with the plea agreement to a 270-day period of jail time, required compliance with the registration requirements of Megan's Law, N.J.S.A. 2C:7-1 to -23, and subjected him to Parole Supervision for Life (PSL).2 2 Defendant also pled guilty to a separate Accusation charging him with third- degree possession of a controlled …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals