State of New Jersey in the Interest of C.F., 132 A.3d 426

In 1976 L.T. was found murdered; autopsy showed stab wounds, strangulation, and intact spermatozoa. Case went cold.
In 2010 DNA from the 1976 evidence matched C.F., who had been 15 in 1976 and lived adjacent to the victim; he was arrested and charged in 2012 as a juvenile for felony murder.
At a four-day bench trial the judge credited evidence (including timing of sperm viability and scene evidence) that the sexual assault occurred at or near the time of death and found C.F. guilty of felony murder.
C.F. did not testify, and defense counsel did not object when a substitute medical examiner (who did not perform the autopsy) testified about the autopsy findings, including timing of the sexual activity.
At sentencing the judge applied the juvenile sentencing statute in effect at sentencing (N.J.S.A. 2A:4A-44(d)(1)(b)), limiting incarceration to 10 years; the State appealed arguing the pre-1983 law (allowing indeterminate life) should apply.
The Appellate Division affirmed the conviction and the sentence, declining to decide the ineffective-assistance/Confrontation Clause claim on direct appeal and explaining that sentencing law governing penalties applies prospectively to penalties incurred after the new law took effect.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State/Cross-Appellant)	Defendant's Argument (C.F.)	Held
Whether sentencing must follow the law in effect when the offense occurred (1976) or the law in effect at sentencing	State: Pre-1983 savings statute and presumption against retroactivity require applying the harsher 1976 penalty (indeterminate life)	C.F.: New juvenile sentencing statute in effect at sentencing controls; limits to 10 years	Court: Apply the law in effect when penalty is incurred; 1983 juvenile statute governs sentencing (10-year cap)
Whether defense counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to object under the Confrontation Clause to a non-testifying medical examiner’s testimony	State: (not applicable)	C.F.: Counsel’s failure to object to substitute autopsy testimony violated Sixth Amendment confrontation rights and was prejudicial	Court: Declined to reach merits on direct appeal due to inadequate record on counsel’s tactical reasons; permitted C.F. to raise claim in post-conviction relief (Preciose)

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes ineffective-assistance-of-counsel standard)
State v. Preciose, 129 N.J. 451 (1992) (post-conviction relief required where trial record cannot show tactical reason for counsel’s actions)
State v. Parks, 192 N.J. 483 (2007) (application of newer sentencing law to penalties incurred after enactment)
State v. Parolin, 171 N.J. 223 (2002) (presumption that criminal legislation is prospective; context where new law enacted after sentencing)
Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (prohibits death penalty for juvenile offenders)
Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012) (bar on mandatory life-without-parole for juvenile offenders)
State v. Bey, 112 N.J. 45 (1988) (application of later- enacted abolition of juvenile death penalty on grounds of fairness and public policy)