NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court ."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-3191-18T1 STATE OF NEW JERSEY, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. GLENNIS HARVE, Defendant-Appellant. _______________________ Submitted December 7, 2020 – Decided January 05, 2021 Before Judges Fasciale and Rothstadt. On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Monmouth County, Indictment No. 14-09- 1674. Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, attorney for appellant (Monique Moyse, Designated Counsel, on the brief). Christopher J. Gramiccioni, Monmouth County Prosecutor, attorney for respondent (Monica do Outeiro, Assistant Prosecutor, of counsel and on the brief; Katrina Koerner, Legal Assistant, on the brief). PER CURIAM Defendant Glennis Harve appeals from the January 4, 2019 denial of his petition for post-conviction relief (PCR) without an evidentiary hearing. For the reasons that follow, we affirm. Defendant pled guilty to one count of third-degree distribution of marijuana, N.J.S.A. 2C:35-5(b)(11). In accordance with his plea agreement, the sentencing court imposed a one-year period of non-custodial probation on January 22, 2015. Defendant did not file a direct appeal from his conviction or sentence. Defendant filed a PCR petition on December 7, 2017, in which he argued that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel (IAC) when his attorney , who he met for the first time when he pled guilty, advised him to accept the plea offer without ever discussing his "immigration status or any immigration consequences of" pleading guilty. According to defendant, if he had known that there were such consequences, he would not have accepted the plea offer. In August 2018, PCR counsel filed an amended petition, a supporting brief, and certifications from defendant and his immigration attorney. In his certification, defendant stated that he felt rushed by his plea counsel into accepting the plea, he did not understand the charges against him, and his attorney never explained the State's case against him. A-3191-18T1 2 Also, defendant admitted that during the plea hearing, he advised counsel and the court that he was a United States citizen, when in fact he was a permanent resident, having been born in Antigua, and not, as his plea form stated, a citizen born in "Neptune, N.J." He also confirmed that after he pled guilty, he informed probation too that he was a citizen and when asked by a probation officer where he was born, he also identified Neptune. According to defendant, he was confused by questions asking him about his citizenship, which he understood related to where he lived at the time, and if he had been asked where he was born, he would have responded that he did not know. Defendant reiterated that had he known of the immigration consequence to his plea, he "would not have entered into any plea that would have resulted ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals