STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. VICTOR SANCHEZ(10-09-2073, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE), A-2168-15T3

Defendant charged with murder; after five days of trial he pleaded to aggravated manslaughter and weapons possession for an aggregate 25-year term under the No Early Release Act.
Before trial the State had offered a 20-year plea; defendant contends he would have accepted that offer if his attorney had disclosed a restaurant surveillance recording earlier.
A defense-predecessor had received an extended surveillance recording but trial counsel initially did not discover or review it; the prosecutor later obtained and disclosed a copy during trial.
Trial counsel moved for mistrial based on the late disclosure; the court denied the motion after reviewing the recording and finding it did not clearly show a fight.
Defendant eventually pled mid-trial and stated at the plea colloquy he was satisfied with counsel; in his PCR petition he alleged ineffective assistance caused him to reject the pre-trial 20-year offer.
The PCR court denied relief without an evidentiary hearing; the Appellate Division affirmed, finding insufficient prejudice to establish ineffective assistance of counsel for plea-decision purposes.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether counsel's failure to discover/review disclosed surveillance constituted ineffective assistance in the plea-decision context	State: even if counsel erred, defendant cannot show resulting prejudice	Sanchez: would have accepted the State's pre-trial 20-year plea if he had seen the recording	Court: assume deficient performance but no prejudice shown
Whether defendant proved a reasonable probability he would have accepted the 20-year offer but for counsel's error	State: defendant's post-hoc claim unsupported by contemporaneous evidence	Sanchez: post-trial affidavit/claim that he would have accepted 20 years	Court: defendant failed to produce the recording or contemporaneous evidence; claim speculative
Whether the court would likely have accepted the 20-year plea such that prejudice is shown	State: uncertainty about court approval and defendant's immigration-driven trial strategy	Sanchez: court would have approved the plea	Court: focus on pre-trial decision; no reasonable probability shown that plea would have been accepted and entered earlier
Whether failure to include the recording in the appellate appendix affects review	State: appellate review limited without the recording	Sanchez: (implicitly) recording would vindicate his claim	Court: defendant did not provide the recording; appellate court relies on trial judge's description and affirms

State v. Harris, 181 N.J. 391 (discussing standard of de novo review for PCR legal conclusions)
Lafler v. Cooper, 566 U.S. 156 (right to effective counsel in plea decisions; prejudice standard)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two-pronged ineffective assistance test)
State v. Fritz, 105 N.J. 42 (applying Strickland in New Jersey)
Missouri v. Frye, 566 U.S. 134 (failure to communicate plea offers and prejudice analysis)
State v. Arthur, 184 N.J. 307 (defense counsel's duty to investigate)
State v. Cummings, 321 N.J. Super. 154 (requiring prima facie showing of prejudice for PCR plea claims)