Preview:

a6276-07.opn.html
N.J.S.A. 2C:15-1. He was sentenced to a six-year term of imprisonment, one year less than the sentence the State
agreed to recommend. The sentence is subject to the No Early Release Act, N.J.S.A. 2C:43-7.2. As contemplated by
the plea agreement, the sentence is concurrent with a sentence for a second-degree robbery defendant committed
in Mercer County, which he was serving when he was sentenced for this second-degree robbery. Pursuant to N.J.S.A.
2C:44-5, defendant was awarded "gap time" credits for the ninety-seven-day period between his sentencing in
Mercer County and his sentencing in Middlesex County. "> Original Wordprocessor Version
This case can also be found at *CITE_PENDING*.
(NOTE: The status of this decision is Unpublished.)
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE
APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
APPELLATE DIVISION
DOCKET NO. A-6276-07T46276-07T4
STATE OF NEW JERSEY,
Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
COREY J. ALLEN, a/k/a CORY ALLEN,
JAMALL ALLEN and CORI JAMALL ALLEN,
Defendant-Appellant.
Submitted July 14, 2009 - Decided
Before Judges Grall and Gilroy.
On appeal from Superior Court of New
Jersey, Law Division, Middlesex County,
Indictment No. 05-06-0830.
Yvonne Smith Segars, Public Defender,
attorney for appellant (Lee March Grayson,
Designated Counsel, on the brief).
Bruce J. Kaplan, Middlesex County Prosecutor, attorney for respondent (Joie Piderit,
Assistant Prosecutor, of counsel and on the brief).
PER CURIAM
file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/Opinions/a6276-07.opn.html[4/20/2013 8:36:56 PM]




a6276-07.opn.html
This is an appeal from a denial of post-conviction relief. After reaching an agreement encompassing
sentencing and the dismissal of pending charges, defendant Corey J. Allen entered a plea of guilty to a charge of
second-degree robbery, N.J.S.A. 2C:15-1. He was sentenced to a six-year term of imprisonment, one year less than
the sentence the State agreed to recommend. The sentence is subject to the No Early Release Act, N.J.S.A. 2C:43-7.2.
As contemplated by the plea agreement, the sentence is concurrent with a sentence for a second-degree robbery
defendant committed in Mercer County, which he was serving when he was sentenced for this second-degree
robbery. Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2C:44-5, defendant was awarded "gap time" credits for the ninety-seven-day period
between his sentencing in Mercer County and his sentencing in Middlesex County.
Defendant was not awarded any jail credits on this sentence. Because he was arrested for and confined on account
of the Mercer County charge between January 20, 2005 and his sentencing in Mercer County on March 10, 2006, he
was awarded jail credits for the 415-day period between the January 20, 2005 arrest and the March 10, 2006
sentencing as time served on the Mercer County sentence. On January 28, 2005, defendant was arrested for the
Middlesex County robbery and bail was set on that charge, but he was already confined on the Mercer County
charge. For that reason, the judge did not award jail credits against the sentence imposed for the Middlesex County
robbery.
Defendant did not appeal from the judgment of conviction and sentence entered in Middlesex County. Instead,
claiming entitlement to jail credits against his Middlesex County sentence, defendant filed a petition for post-
conviction relief.
The trial judge denied the petition. He reasoned that the jail credits had been awarded against the Mercer County
sentence and were not available to reduce this sentence. The judge also observed that he had imposed a sentence
one year lower than the sentence contemplated by defendant's plea agreement, which ameliorated the impact of
the interval between the sentencing proceedings in Mercer and Middlesex Counties.
Defendant raises the following issues on appeal from the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief:
I. THE DEFENDANT SHOULD HAVE BEEN GIVEN
415 DAYS OF JAIL TIME CREDIT FOR THE TIME THAT HE WAS INCARCERATED
FOR THE MIDDLESEX COUNTY ROBBERY CHARGE FROM JANUARY 28, 2 005
THROUGH MARCH 10, 2 006 IN ADDITION TO 97 DAYS' GAP TIME.
II. THE SENTENCE IMPOSED WAS ILLEGAL AND
MUST BE VACATED.
III. THE DEFENDANT WAS DENIED THE EFFECTIVE
file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/Opinions/a6276-07.opn.html[4/20/2013 8:36:56 PM]




a6276-07.opn.html
ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL BY HIS APPOINTED ATTORNEY, CULMINATING IN HIS
GUILTY PLEA IN VIOLATION OF THE NEW JERSEY AND UNITED STATES
CONSTITUTIONS. (Partially Raised Below).
A. The Defendant was Denied the
Effective Assistance of Counsel
Because At No Point Before His Plea
or Sentencing Was a Motion Made to
Consolidate the Charges Pending in
Mercer County and Middlesex County
into One County Prior to
Disposition. (Not Raised Below).
B. PCR Counsel Failed to Raise the
Consolidation Issue and Was Deficient. [(Not Raised Below).]
C. Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
is Evident in This Case Because
Trial Counsel Failed (1) to
Properly Investigate the Case; (2)
Did Not Provide the Defendant with
Discovery; (3) Did Not Communicate
with the Defendant; and (4)
Pressured the Defendant into
Pleading Guilty.
D. PCR Counsel failed to elaborate on
any of the issues raised in POINT
III(c). [(Not Raised Below).]
IV. THE PCR COURT SHOULD HAVE CONDUCTED AN
EVIDENTIARY HEARING TO DETERMINE THE INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF
COUNSEL ISSUE AND OTHER ISSUES RAISED IN THE DEFENDANT'S POST-
CONVICTION RELIEF PETITION.
V. REVERSAL IS REQUIRED IN THIS CASE
BECAUSE OF THE CUMULATIVE EFFECTS OF THE ERRORS DURING THE
SENTENCING HEARING AND INEFFECTIVENESS OF APPOINTED TRIAL COUNSEL.
The arguments raised in Points II, IV and V of defendant's brief lack sufficient merit to warrant discussion in a
written opinion. R. 2:11-3(e)(2). We address the remaining issues in the paragraphs that follow.
file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/Opinions/a6276-07.opn.html[4/20/2013 8:36:56 PM]




a6276-07.opn.html
The argument advanced in Point I is that the trial judge erred by declining to exercise discretion and award jail
credits against the Middlesex County sentence that duplicated jail credits awarded against the Mercer County
sentence. We disagree.
Rule 3:21-8 provides that, "[t]he defendant shall receive credit on the term of a custodial sentence for any time
served in custody in jail or in a state hospital between arrest and the imposition of sentence." Although "[n]either
the Criminal Code nor the Rules address the propriety or permissibility of giving an inmate jail credit against more
than one sentence," State v. Black, 153 N.J. 438, 456-57 (1998), jail credits generally are understood to "appl[y] to
confinement attributable to the offense that gave rise to the sentence." State v. Carreker, 172 N.J. 100, 115 (2002).
As this court has observed, jail "credit is impermissible if the confinement is due to service of a prior-imposed
sentence or another charge." State v. Hemphill, 391 N.J. Super. 67, 71 (App. Div.), certif. denied, 192 N.J. 68 (2007).
Defendant's confinement from January 20, 2005 forward was attributable to the second-degree robbery charge
pending in Mercer County. For that reason the trial court's application of Rule 3:21-8 was not inconsistent with the
precedents. Moreover, the denial of jail credits did not deprive defendant of the benefit of his plea agreement,
which was for concurrent, not coterminous, sentences.
The arguments raised in Points III A and B of defendant's brief were not raised below, and for that reason we decline
to consider them on appeal. That approach conforms with the "general policy against entertaining ineffective-
assistance-of-counsel claims on direct appeal because such claims involve allegations and evidence that lie outside
the trial record."
State v. Preciose, 129 N.J. 451, 460 (1992).
Affirmed.
(continued)
(continued)
2
A-6276-07T4
September 18, 2009
file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/Opinions/a6276-07.opn.html[4/20/2013 8:36:56 PM]




a6276-07.opn.html
0x01 graphic
This archive is a service of Rutgers School of Law - Camden.
file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/Opinions/a6276-07.opn.html[4/20/2013 8:36:56 PM]

Download a6276-07.opn.pdf

New Jersey Law