STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. HECTOR ROYAL(03-10-1134, UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
A-3681-15T4
| N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. | Sep 22, 2017Background
- Defendant Hector Royal convicted by jury of multiple violent offenses (three counts of first-degree robbery; second-degree burglary; possession of a firearm for an unlawful purpose; unlawful possession of a handgun) arising from an armed warehouse robbery; sentenced to 30 years subject to NERA.
- Co-defendant Omar Jones testified for the State identifying Royal as a perpetrator; defendant also made an inculpatory statement to Detective Spano referencing the getaway car’s make during a post-arrest interview.
- At trial defense counsel considered but ultimately did not call Dawn Haher (mother of two of defendant’s children) as an alibi witness; counsel had interviewed Haher and gave notice of an alibi defense to the State.
- At the PCR evidentiary hearing Haher testified she was with Royal on the night of the robbery but could not recall specific facts, dates, or corroborating details; the prosecutor had earlier contacted Haher and she told the prosecutor she would not be a defense witness.
- The PCR court found Haher’s alibi testimony equivocal/unconvincing, concluded trial counsel’s decision not to call her was a reasonable strategic choice, and that defendant failed both Strickland prongs (deficient performance and prejudice).
- Appellate Division affirmed denial of post-conviction relief, holding counsel’s choice was a strategic decision and, even if Haher had testified, there was no reasonable probability of a different outcome given the co-defendant’s ID and defendant’s own inculpatory statement.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether defendant was denied effective assistance of counsel by trial counsel's failure to call an alibi witness | State: trial counsel’s decision was strategic and reasonable; no prejudice shown | Royal: counsel’s failure to call Haher deprived him of a credible alibi and was ineffective assistance | Denied — counsel’s decision was a reasonable strategic choice; defendant failed both Strickland prongs |
Key Cases Cited
- Preciose v. State, 129 N.J. 451 (describing standard and burden for PCR)
- Fritz v. State, 105 N.J. 42 (presumption that counsel’s conduct is reasonable)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance two‑prong test)
- Castagna v. State, 187 N.J. 293 (deference to trial counsel’s strategic choices)
- Johnson v. State, 42 N.J. 146 (trial judge’s credibility determinations entitled to deference)
- Harris v. State, 181 N.J. 391 (deference to PCR factual findings supported by credible evidence)
- Cronic v. United States, 466 U.S. 648 (constructive denial standards and prejudice discussion)
- Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (warning requirements for custodial interrogation)