STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. DWAYNE WILSONÂ (07-04-0720, HUDSON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE), A-0475-15T2

Background

Dwayne Wilson was indicted for multiple murders and related offenses arising from the stabbing deaths of his sister and two of her children and the stabbing of a surviving child; he pleaded guilty to three counts of aggravated manslaughter (amended) and one count of second‑degree aggravated assault (amended).
At sentencing the court found aggravating factors (N.J.S.A. 2C:44‑1(a)(1), (2), (3), and (6)); no mitigating factors were found; sentence: concurrent 30‑year terms on manslaughters plus consecutive 10 years on assault, all subject to No Early Release Act.
Wilson’s direct appeal was affirmed. He later filed a pro se PCR petition alleging ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel and related sentencing errors.
PCR counsel argued trial counsel failed to challenge the State’s proposed aggravating factors (claiming double‑counting), failed to dispute reliance on uncharged/no‑billed matters, and failed to correct the court’s statement that no mitigating factors applied.
The PCR court denied the petition without an evidentiary hearing; Wilson appealed the denial to the Appellate Division, which affirmed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Wilson)	Held
Whether trial counsel was ineffective at sentencing for failing to object to the court’s finding of aggravating factor (a)(1) (nature/heinousness)	Counsel’s performance was reasonable; the record supports the court’s findings and counsel preserved relevant arguments in sentencing memo	Counsel failed to object to (a)(1), permitting impermissible double‑counting of facts that establish the offenses	Denied — counsel presented the double‑counting argument in a detailed sentencing memorandum; performance not deficient
Whether trial counsel was ineffective for not objecting to finding aggravating factor (a)(2) (victim vulnerability/extreme youth)	The court’s findings were supported by the record and counsel had raised mitigating arguments; no deficient performance	Counsel failed to object to (a)(2), which duplicates elements of the offense	Denied — counsel had argued against such findings in writing; no deficiency shown
Whether counsel was ineffective for not contesting aggravating factor (a)(9) (need for deterrence) and distinction between general and specific deterrence	Record of multiple violent convictions supports both general and specific deterrence; a challenge would be meritless	Counsel should have distinguished and argued against specific deterrence	Denied — deterrence findings were supported; failing to make a meritless argument is not ineffective assistance
Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to correct court’s statement that no mitigating factors applied and for not objecting to prosecutor’s reliance on no‑billed/uncharged matters	Counsel had advanced mitigating factors in sentencing memorandum (b)(2), (b)(4), (b)(8); PCR record shows no reliance by court on no‑billed matters	Counsel failed to correct court and failed to object to State’s references to uncharged/no‑billed cases	Denied — counsel did present mitigating arguments in writing; there is no evidence the court relied on no‑billed matters; no prejudice shown

Key Cases Cited

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (established two‑prong ineffective assistance test)
State v. Fritz, 105 N.J. 42 (New Jersey adoption of Strickland standard)
State v. Fuentes, 217 N.J. 57 (impermissible double‑counting at sentencing)
State v. Nash, 212 N.J. 518 (right to effective assistance of counsel)
State v. Gaitan, 209 N.J. 339 (burden on PCR to prove entitlement to relief)
State v. Harris, 181 N.J. 391 (standard of review for PCR courts; de novo review where no evidentiary hearing)
State v. Chew, 179 N.J. 186 (prejudice standard; undermining confidence in result)
State v. Worlock, 117 N.J. 596 (no ineffective assistance for failing to raise meritless arguments)
State v. Walker, 322 N.J. Super. 535 (sentencing transcript controls over conflicting judgment of conviction)