Strickland two-part test in New Jersey

2026Finding trial 2 Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984) (requiring a defendant seeking PCR on ineffective assistance of counsel grounds demonstrate: (1) the particular manner in which counsel's performance was deficient; and (2) the deficiency prejudiced defendant's right to a fair trial); see also State v. Fritz, 105 N.J. 42, 58 (1987) (adopting the Strickland two-part test in New Jersey).

2026Id. at 687 ; see also State v. Fritz, 105 N.J. 42, 58 (1987) (adopting the Strickland two-part test in New Jersey).

2026Finding trial 2 Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984) (requiring a defendant seeking PCR on ineffective assistance of counsel grounds demonstrate: (1) the particular manner in which counsel's performance was deficient; and (2) the deficiency prejudiced defendant's right to a fair trial); see also State v. Fritz, 105 N.J. 42, 58 (1987) (adopting the Strickland two-part test in New Jersey).

2026Id. at 687 ; see also State v. Fritz, 105 N.J. 42, 58 (1987) (adopting the Strickland two-part test in New Jersey).

2026In reviewing such ineffective assistance claims, courts apply a strong presumption that defense counsel "rendered adequate assistance and made all significant decisions in the exercise of reasonable professional judgment." Strickland, 466 U.S. at 690 . "[C]omplaints 'merely of matters of trial strategy' will not serve to ground a constitutional claim of inadequacy . . ." Fritz, 105 N.J.at 54 (citation omitted); see also State v. Echols, 199 N.J. 344, 357-59 (2009).

2019When reviewing such claims of ineffectiveness, courts apply a strong presumption that defense counsel "rendered adequate assistance and made all significant decisions in the exercise of reasonable professional judgment." Strickland, 466 U.S. at 690 . "[C]omplaints 'merely of matters of trial strategy' will not serve to ground a constitutional claim of inadequacy . . . ." Fritz, 105 A-4451-17T1 7 N.J. at 54 (citation omitted); see also State v. Echols, 199 N.J. 344, 357-59 (2009).

2026Regarding the first prong, deficient performance, "the test is whether counsel's conduct fell below an objective standard of reasonableness." State v. A-2802-23 13 Savage, 120 N.J. 594, 614 (1990) (citing Strickland, 466 U.S. at 688 ). "[A] defendant challenging assistance of counsel must demonstrate that counsel's actions were beyond the 'wide range of professionally competent assistance.'" Ibid. (quoting Strickland, 466 U.S. at 690 ).

2024With respect to the first prong of deficient performance, "the test is whether counsel's conduct fell below an objective standard of reasonableness." State v. Savage, 120 N.J. 594, 614 (1990) (citing Strickland, 466 U.S. at 688 ). "[A] defendant challenging assistance of counsel must demonstrate that A-2638-22 5 counsel's actions were beyond the 'wide range of professionally competent assistance.'" Ibid. (quoting Strickland, 466 U.S. at 690 ).

2021In a conviction based on a guilty plea, the petitioner must show "a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's errors, [the petitioner] would not A-4486-18T1 8 have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial," Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 59 (1985), and doing so "would have been rational under the circumstances," Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356, 372 (2010) (citing Roe v. Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. 470, 480 (2000)).

2020In reviewing such claims, courts apply a strong presumption that defense counsel "rendered adequate assistance and made all significant decisions in the exercise of reasonable professional judgment." Strickland, 466 U.S. at 690 . "[C]omplaints 'merely of matters of trial strategy' will not serve to ground a constitutional claim of inadequacy . . . ." Fritz, 105 N.J. at 42, 54 (1987) (citations omitted); see also State v. Perry, 124 N.J. 128, 153 (1991); Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 59 (1985) (articulating the "reasonable probability" test A-1447-18T1 6 where a defendant claims his counsel di

2020When A-0352-18T2 5 reviewing such claims, courts apply a strong presumption that defense counsel "rendered adequate assistance and made all significant decisions in the exercise of reasonable professional judgment." Strickland, 466 U.S. at 690 . "[C]omplaints 'merely of matters of trial strategy' will not serve to ground a constitutional claim of inadequacy . . . ." Fritz, 105 N.J. at 54 (citations omitted); see also State v. Perry, 124 N.J. 128, 153 (1991).

2020In reviewing such claims, courts apply a strong presumption that defense counsel "rendered adequate assistance and made all significant decisions in the exercise of reasonable professional judgment." Strickland, 466 U.S. at 690 . "[C]omplaints 'merely of matters of trial strategy' will not serve to ground a constitutional claim of inadequacy . . . ." Fritz, 105 N.J. at 42, 54 (1987) (citations omitted); see also State v. Perry, 124 N.J. 128, 153 (1991); Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 59 (1985) (articulating the "reasonable probability" test A-1447-18T1 6 where a defendant claims his counsel di

2023Super. 16, 22 (App. Div. 2012)); see also Nuñez-Valdez, 200 N.J. at 138-39. 4 Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984) (requiring a defendant seeking PCR on ineffective assistance of counsel grounds to demonstrate: (1) the particular manner in which counsel's performance was deficient; and (2) that the deficiency prejudiced defendant's right to a fair trial); see also State v. Fritz, 105 N.J. 42, 58 (1987) (adopting the Strickland two-part test in New Jersey).

2022In the context of plea agreements of non-citizen defendants, the performance of plea counsel is deficient under the first prong of the Strickland 2 Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984); State v. Fritz, 105 N.J. 42, 58 (1987). 10 A-2766-19 standard where counsel "provides false or misleading information concerning the deportation consequences of a plea of guilty." Nuñez-Valdéz, 200 N.J. at 138 .

2024"With respect to both prongs of the Strickland test, a defendant asserting ineffective assistance of counsel on PCR bears the burden of proving his or her right to relief by a preponderance of the evidence." State v. Gaitan, 209 N.J. 339, 350 (2012).

2018Pursuant to Rule 3:22-2(a), a criminal defendant is entitled to post-conviction relief if there was a "[s]ubstantial denial in the conviction proceedings of defendant's rights under 3 Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984); State v. Fritz, 105 N.J. 42 (1987) (adopting the Strickland two-part test in New Jersey). 6 A-2741-16T3 the Constitution of the United States or the Constitution or laws of the State of New Jersey." "[A] defendant asserting ineffective assistance of counsel on PCR bears the burden of proving his or her right to relief by a preponderance of the evidence." State v. Gai

2021In a conviction based on a guilty plea, the petitioner must show "a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's errors, [the petitioner] would not A-4486-18T1 8 have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial," Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 59 (1985), and doing so "would have been rational under the circumstances," Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356, 372 (2010) (citing Roe v. Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. 470, 480 (2000)).

2019"Before deciding whether to plead guilty, a defendant is entitled to 'the effective assistance of competent counsel.'" Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356, 364 (2010) (quoting McMann v. Richardson, 397 U.S. 759, 771 (1970); Strickland, 466 U.S. at 686 ).

2019State v. Cummings, 321 N.J.

2019He must allege facts sufficient to demonstrate counsel's alleged substandard performance." State v. Cummings, 321 N.J.

2017Moreover, there must be "material issues of disputed fact that cannot be resolved by reference to the existing record," and the court must determine that "an evidentiary hearing is necessary to resolve the claims for relief." State v. Porter, 216 N.J. 343, 354 (2013) (quoting R. 3:22-10(b)).

2017Rule 3:22-10(b) provides that a defendant is only entitled to an evidentiary hearing on a PCR petition if he establishes a prima facie case in support of PCR, "there are material issues of disputed fact that cannot be resolved by reference to the existing record," and the court determines that "an evidentiary hearing is necessary to resolve the claims for relief." See also State v. Porter, 216 N.J. 343, 354 (2013).

2024Citing our Supreme Court precedent and the Rules of Professional Conduct, the judge was convinced defendant neither demonstrated a per se conflict of interest, see State v. Cottle, 194 N.J. 449, 467 (2008), nor a 2 Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984) (recognizing to establish an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, a defendant must demonstrate: (1) "counsel's performance was deficient"; and (2) "the deficient performance prejudiced the defense"); State v. Fritz, 105 N.J. 42, 58 (1987) (adopting the Strickland two-part test in New Jersey).

2021In a conviction based on a guilty plea, the petitioner must show "a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's errors, [the petitioner] would not A-4486-18T1 8 have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial," Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 59 (1985), and doing so "would have been rational under the circumstances," Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356, 372 (2010) (citing Roe v. Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. 470, 480 (2000)).

2019In the accompanying thirty-two page written statement of reasons, the judge rejected several of defendant's IAC claims and limited the hearing to the following issues: (1) whether trial counsel properly communicated with defendant, investigated the evidence, and prepared for trial; (2) whether trial counsel properly investigated mitigating factors, prepared for and represented defendant at sentencing; and (3) whether defendant was denied effective assistance of counsel in his pro se plea withdrawal motion.7 At the ensuing evidentiary hearing, defendant testified his attorney spoke to him a tot

2019"This requires showing that counsel's errors were so serious as to deprive the defendant of a fair trial, a trial whose result is reliable." Fritz, 105 N.J. at 52 (quoting Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687 ); accord State v. Castagna, 187 N.J. 293, 314-15 (2006).

2019"Before deciding whether to plead guilty, a defendant is entitled to 'the effective assistance of competent counsel.'" Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356, 364 (2010) (quoting McMann v. Richardson, 397 U.S. 759, 771 (1970); Strickland, 466 U.S. at 686 ).

2019According to Yolanda, her trial counsel's performance 2 We note that at the May 2, 2018 best interest hearing, defense counsel argued that pursuant to Watkins v. Nelson, 163 N.J. 235, 247 (2000), "there need[ed] to be 'proof of parental unfitness,' misconduct, abandonment, or 'exceptional circumstances' … in order for [Wendy] to leave . . . with custody." The court disagreed, concluding that Watkins was factually inapposite to the circumstances that led to Sarah's removal and which prevented reunification.

2019To challenge a guilty plea based on the ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must demonstrate "that there is reasonable probability that, but for counsel's errors, [the defendant] would not have pled guilty and would have insisted on going to trial." State v. Nuñez-Valdéz, 200 N.J. 129, 139 (2009) (alteration in original) (quoting State v. DiFrisco, 137 N.J. 434, 457 (1994)).

2018In reviewing such claims, courts apply a strong presumption that defense counsel "rendered adequate assistance and made all significant decisions in the exercise of reasonable professional judgment." Strickland, 466 U.S. at 690 . "[C]omplaints 'merely of matters of trial strategy' will not serve to ground a constitutional claim of inadequacy . . . ." Fritz, 105 N.J. at 54 (quoting State v. Williams, 39 N.J. 471, 489 (1963), overruled on other grounds by, State v. Czachor, 82 N.J. 392 (1980)).

2017Ed. 2d 674, 693 (1984); State v. Fritz, 105 N.J. 42, 52 (1987) (adopting the Strickland two-part test in New Jersey). "[T]o establish prejudice, a defendant must show not only that the outcome of his trial would have been different absent the alleged deficient representation, but also that the deficient representation rendered the result of his proceeding fundamentally unfair or unreliable." State v. Holmes, 290 N.J.

2017A defendant must do more than demonstrate that an alleged error might have "had some conceivable effect on the outcome of the trial," instead, he or she must prove that the error is "so serious as to undermine our confidence in the jury's verdict." State v. Sheika, 337 N.J.

1986See Hill v. Lockhart, ___ U.S. ___, ___, 106 S.Ct. 366, 370 , 88 L.Ed. 2d 203, 210 (1985); State v. Rhoda, 206 N.J.