On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Morris County, Indictment Nos. 99-10-1282, 00-10-1260, 00-09-1187, 00-08-0983, 01-02-0158, 00-08-1029, and Essex County, Indictment No. 00-04-1104.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
Submitted November 29, 2010 - Decided Before Judges Lisa and Alvarez.
Defendant appeals from the February 19, 2008 order denying his post-conviction relief (PCR) petition. The petition arose out of an aggregate sentence of forty years imprisonment with a sixteen-year parole disqualifier that was imposed on May 24, 2001 on multiple charges contained in seven separate indictments to which defendant had pled guilty. The guilty plea was entered pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, and the base term of the sentence imposed was lower than that recommended in the plea agreement. Further, pursuant to the terms of the plea agreement, five additional indictments and various other pending complaints were dismissed. For the reasons that follow we affirm.
On direct appeal, defendant raised the following issues:
THE TRIAL COURT SHOULD HAVE GRANTED THE MOTION TO SUPPRESS.
POINT II THE SENTENCE WAS EXCESSIVE.
The suppression motion pertained to only two of the indictments to which defendant had pled guilty, for offenses occurring on a single date. We rejected appellant's arguments and affirmed his convictions and overall sentence. State v. Crumblin, No. A-0310-01 (App. Div. March 25, 2004).*fn1 The Supreme Court denied defendant's petition for certification. State v. Crumblin, 180 N.J. 454 (2004).
Defendant then filed his PCR petition. Counsel was assigned and filed a brief raising the following arguments:
COUNSEL IMPROPERLY ADVISED THE DEFENDANT AS TO THE DEGREE OF THE OFFENSES.
POINT 2 DEFENDANT WAS FACING A MANDATORY EXTENDED TERM AND NOT PERSISTENT OFFENDER SENTENCING. POINT 3 COUNSEL FAILED TO ARGUE THAT THE COURT HAD THE DISCRETION TO IMPOSE A ...