STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. BRYANT HAMILTON

(NOTE: The status of this decision is .)
 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-1578-05T21578-05T2

STATE OF NEW JERSEY,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

BRYANT HAMILTON,

Defendant-Appellant.

___________________________________________________

 

Submitted September 27, 2006 - Decided

Before Judges Wefing and C.S. Fisher.

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Camden County, Indictment No. I-1583-04-05.

Paul H. Scull, Jr., attorney for appellant.

James P. Lynch, Acting Camden County Prosecutor, attorney for respondent (Roseann A. Finn, Acting Assistant Prosecutor, of counsel and on the brief).

PER CURIAM

During the early morning hours of January 15, 2005, defendant, a police officer, allowed his vehicle to enter the lanes of oncoming traffic on a highway in Gloucester, causing his vehicle to come into contact with another vehicle and causing personal injuries to the other vehicle's passengers. His blood/alcohol level at the time was higher than lawfully permitted.

Defendant was charged in an indictment with three counts of second-degree aggravated assault, N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1(b)(1), and three counts of third-degree aggravated assault, N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1(c)(1). On August 22, 2005, defendant entered into a negotiated plea agreement which resulted in his guilty plea to an amended count of third-degree assault by auto. The State also agreed to recommend a non-custodial sentence of probation and to move for the dismissal of all remaining counts. In addition, defendant agreed to forfeit public employment for life and to waive his right to appeal. At sentencing, the judge imposed a three-year term of probation, and ordered that defendant forfeit his job as a police officer and all public employment for life as well, directed that he abide by the conditions of probation, suspended defendant's driving privileges for a seven-month period, and imposed mandatory fees and monetary penalties. The judge dismissed the remaining counts of the indictment and also dismissed various motor vehicle summons issued as a result of the January 15, 2005 incident.

On appeal, defendant raises a single point for our consideration:

THE FAILURE OF THE DEFENDANT'S COUNSEL TO CHALLENGE THE INDICTMENT AT THE DEFENDANT'S REQUEST; COUNSEL'S FAILURE TO RETAIN AN ACCIDENT RECONSTRUCTION SPECIALIST AS RE-QUESTED BY THE DEFENDANT; COUNSEL'S FAILURE TO CHALLENGE THE CHAIN OF CUSTODY OF THE BLOOD SAMPLE; AND HIS REFUSAL TO INVESTIGATE THE STATEMENTS MADE BY THE WITNESSES TO THE ACCIDENT RENDERED HIS COUNSEL TO THE DEFEN-DANT INEFFECTIVE, AND WARRANTS VACATING THE DEFENDANT'S CONVICTION.

We decline to reach the merit of this argument on direct appeal, concluding that, because it appears the allegations and evidence relevant to defendant's contentions lie outside the trial record, the matter is best left for consideration by way of a petition for post-conviction relief. State v. Preciose, 129 N.J. 451, 460 (1992).

 
Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is affirmed without prejudice to defendant's right to pursue the issue raised by way of a petition for post-conviction relief.

(continued)

(continued)

3

A-1578-05T2

October 16, 2006