June 13, 2012
STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
MELVIN SHAWN JONES, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Atlantic County, Indictment No. 91-08-02257-C.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
Submitted February 1, 2012
Before Judges Fuentes and Koblitz.
Defendant Melvin Shawn Jones appeals from the order of the Criminal Part denying his third post conviction relief (PCR) petition. We affirm.
On October 3, 1991, after having killed a taxi driver in the course of robbing him, defendant pled guilty to felony murder, N.J.S.A. 2C:11-3(a)(3), pursuant to a negotiated agreement with the State. On November 21, 1991, the court sentenced defendant to life imprisonment with thirty years of parole ineligibility. We affirmed on defendant's direct appeal which was heard through the summary process provided in Rule 2:9-11, and the Supreme Court denied certification. State v. Melvin Shawn Jones, 130 N.J. 595 (1992).
On February 5, 1995, defendant filed his first PCR petition, alleging that: (1) at the time he entered his guilty plea, he was unaware that the court would impose a thirty-year parole ineligibility period; (2) he was coerced into pleading guilty; and (3) his attorney provided ineffective assistance. The PCR judge denied the petition and, on defendant's appeal, we affirmed. State v. Melvin Shawn Jones, No. A-1068-95 (App. Div. December 3, 1996). On February 25, 2000, the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey denied defendant's petition for habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254. Jones v. Hendricks, Civ. No. 98-1474 (WGB) (D.N.J. Feb. 25, 2000) (slip op. at 8).*fn1
Defendant filed his second PCR petition on March 15, 2004, again alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. The trial court denied the petition on September 29, 2005. Defendant filed this third PCR petition on March 2, 2010, again arguing ineffective assistance of counsel, and claiming that his guilty plea was not supported by an adequate factual basis. By order dated May 25, 2010, the court denied the petition as time-barred under Rule 3:22-12(a)(2).
Defendant now appeals from this order raising the following arguments.
Court erred that Petition for Post Conviction relief is time barred by N.J.C.R. 3:22-12(a)(2).
Court erred that Petition for Post Conviction relief is time barred by N.J.C.R. 3:22-4(b).
Court erred by denial PCR of ineffective assistance of counsel wherein plea agreement was coerced and violated being a manifest injustice.
The arguments raised by defendant lack sufficient merit to warrant discussion in a written opinion. R. 2:11-3(e)(2). As correctly noted by the trial court, defendant's third PCR petition is barred pursuant to Rule 3:22-12(a)(2). Defendant has not articulated any basis to relax the clear time restrictions imposed by the rule.