NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court."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-5825-17T4 STATE OF NEW JERSEY, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. EMMANUEL T. NEEWILLY, Defendant-Appellant. Submitted November 19, 2019 – Decided December 30, 2019 Before Judges Currier and Firko. On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Atlantic County, Indictment Nos. 11-09- 2282, 11-12-2977, and 12-08-1847. Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, attorney for appellant (Karen A. Lodeserto, Designated Counsel, on the brief). Damon G. Tyner, Atlantic County Prosecutor, attorney for respondent (Nicole Lynn Campellone, Assistant Prosecutor, of counsel and on the brief). PER CURIAM Defendant Emmanuel Neewilly appeals from the denial of his post- conviction relief (PCR) petition. Defendant contends the ineffective assistance of three different lawyers, who represented him on three indictments, caused him to plead guilty without knowledge of deportation consequences.1 He asserts an evidentiary hearing was required to hear the testimony of the lawyers and consider the "substance of their legal advice." Because we find defendant has not demonstrated a prima facie showing of ineffective counsel, we affirm. Defendant pled guilty under Atlantic County Indictment 11-09-2282 to second-degree unlawful possession of a handgun, N.J.S.A. 2C:39-5(b). On the same day, he pled guilty under Atlantic County Indictment 11-12-2977 to third- degree receiving stolen property, N.J.S.A. 2C:20-7. Prior to sentencing, defendant was charged in a third indictment, and he pled guilty to second-degree unlawful possession of a handgun, N.J.S.A. 2C:39-5(b). On the plea forms executed prior to the guilty pleas on the first two indictments, defendant acknowledged he was not a citizen of the United States and that he understood a guilty plea could result in his removal from this country. Defendant advised on the forms he was aware he could consult with an attorney about his immigration status. He indicated he had in fact discussed 1 Defendant has been deported to Liberia. A-5825-17T4 2 the immigration consequences of a guilty plea with his plea counsel. On the forms, defendant declined the opportunity to consult with counsel further about the immigration issues and indicated he wished to plead guilty. At the plea hearing on the first two indictments in February 2012, defendant was represented by separate counsel on each indictment. One of the attorneys stated to the court: The only other issue [is] that he is not a U.S. Citizen. He is a permanent resident. He understands that by virtue of this plea he may be deported. He has consulted and/or will further consult with immigration attorneys. He does not wish to stop and do that. He wishes to proceed today. Defendant agreed verbally that he understood what his attorney had communicated to the court, he agreed with it, and he wished to proceed. The second attorney then told the court ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals