STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. T.J.D.(07-03-0576, BURLINGTON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)(RECORD IMPOUNDED), A-0267-14T4

Background

Defendant T.J.D. convicted after a three-day jury trial of multiple sexual-offense and related charges for assaults on his two young children; sentenced to an aggregate 49-year term with Megan's Law and parole-supervision requirements.
Direct appeal affirmed convictions and sentences; New Jersey Supreme Court denied certification.
Defendant filed a pro se PCR petition alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel in several respects (failure to hire an investigator, failure to investigate work records, failure to retain experts, failure to call or interview witnesses, failure to confront child-witness with prior recantation/Michaels issues, and cumulative error); counsel later filed an expanded brief adding related claims.
The PCR judge denied relief without an evidentiary hearing, finding trial counsel made reasonable strategic choices, elicited inconsistencies, and avoided opening the door to damaging Division records or explicit abuse details.
On appeal from denial of PCR without an evidentiary hearing, the Appellate Division affirmed, concluding defendant failed to establish a prima facie case of ineffective assistance and was not entitled to a hearing.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether defendant was entitled to an evidentiary hearing on PCR	State: no, because defendant failed to make a prima facie showing of ineffective assistance	T.J.D.: counsel made multiple deficient omissions warranting a hearing	Held: No; defendant failed to show a reasonable likelihood of success and thus no hearing required
Whether trial counsel was ineffective for not hiring an investigator	State: counsel's strategy was reasonable and no specific facts were proffered that an investigator would have uncovered	T.J.D.: an investigator would have found exculpatory evidence altering the outcome	Held: No; defendant failed to allege facts or affidavits showing what an investigation would have revealed
Whether counsel erred in not confronting child-witness with Division recantation / requesting a Michaels hearing	State: counsel pursued credibility attacks without using Division records to avoid opening damaging evidence; Michaels issues were litigated or harmless because Dr. DeLago’s statements were not admitted	T.J.D.: counsel should have used recantation and obtained a Michaels hearing to exclude unreliable statements	Held: No; counsel’s approach was a sound strategy and defendant suffered no prejudice
Whether counsel was ineffective for not calling Dr. DeLago or other experts on lack of physical evidence	State: calling Dr. DeLago risked eliciting explicit abuse details and could have harmed defendant; counsel argued lack of physical findings through other means	T.J.D.: expert testimony would have emphasized absence of physical evidence and aided defense	Held: No; reasonable tactical decision to avoid opening damaging testimony and counsel adequately emphasized lack of physical findings

Key Cases Cited

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two-prong ineffective-assistance test)
State v. Fritz, 105 N.J. 42 (adopts Strickland in New Jersey)
State v. Marshall, 148 N.J. 89 (prima facie showing required for PCR evidentiary hearing)
State v. Castagna, 187 N.J. 293 (strategic decisions reviewed for objective reasonableness)
State v. Porter, 216 N.J. 343 (requirements for alleging inadequate investigation in PCR)
State v. Michaels, 136 N.J. 299 (governs admissibility/trustworthiness of child statements)
State v. Davis, 116 N.J. 341 (failure of strategy does not by itself establish ineffectiveness)
State v. Parker, 212 N.J. 269 (restates Strickland/Fritz standards)