NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court ."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-4613-18T4 STATE OF NEW JERSEY, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. JAHMAI S. JAMES, a/k/a JAHMAI SUDANI JAMES, and JAHMAI JAMES, Defendant-Appellant. ____________________________ Submitted October 14, 2020 – Decided November 25, 2020 Before Judges Fisher and Moynihan. On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Essex County, Accusation No. 15-06- 0195. Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, attorney for appellant (Robert K. Uyehara, Jr., Designated Counsel on the brief). Gurbir S. Grewal, Attorney General, attorney for respondent (Catlin A. Davis, Deputy Attorney General, of counsel and on the brief). PER CURIAM Defendant Jahmai S. James appeals from the denial of his post- conviction relief (PCR) petition, arguing: POINT I THE PCR COURT ERRED IN DENYING DEFENDANT'S PCR CLAIM OF INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL. A. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN FAILING TO FIND THAT DEFENDANT RECEIVED INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL AT THE PLEA AND SENTENCING REGARDING HIS IMMIGRATION CONSEQUENCES. B. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN DENYING DEFENDANT AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING. Reviewing the factual inferences drawn by the trial court and its legal conclusions de novo because the trial court did not conduct an evidentiary hearing, State v. Blake, 444 N.J. Super. 285, 294 (App. Div. 2016), we are compelled to reverse and remand this matter for an evidentiary hearing. Not only did the trial court mistakenly analyze the PCR petition under the test for A-4613-18T4 2 plea withdrawal instead of the Strickland-Fritz standard, 1 the record reveals defendant established a prima facie case of ineffective assistance of counsel so as to warrant an evidentiary hearing. Defendant supported his PCR petition with a certification averring his plea counsel knew he was born in Jamaica; counsel never discussed "that there were immigration consequences to the plea and that [defendant] would surely be deported" after he pleaded guilty on June 5, 2015 to two counts in Accusation 15-06-195: second-degree unlawful possession of a weapon 1 To establish a PCR claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must satisfy the two-pronged test formulated in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984), and adopted by our Supreme Court in State v. Fritz, 105 N.J. 42, 58 (1987), first by "showing that counsel made errors so serious that counsel was not functioning as the 'counsel' guaranteed . . . by the Sixth Amendment," then by proving he suffered prejudice due to counsel's deficient performance, Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687; see also Fritz, 105 N.J. at 52. Defendant must show by a "reasonable probability" that the deficient performance affected the outcome of the proceeding. Fritz, 105 N.J. at 58. A defendant's motion to withdraw a guilty plea is analyzed under the four-factor test announced in State v. ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals