STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. KEITH KENION(04-02-0178, CUMBERLAND COUNTY AND STATEWIDE), A-1883-14T4

Background

In 2003 Kenion and co-defendants entered the elderly Youngs' home, assaulted them, bound and gagged them, and stole coins and valuables; Mr. Young suffered severe head trauma and lasting injury.
Police recovered Youngs' property from a vehicle associated with defendants; coins were found near Kenion after his removal from the vehicle.
A jury convicted Kenion of multiple offenses including two counts of first-degree kidnapping and other violent crimes; he was sentenced to life subject to NERA.
This court affirmed the convictions on direct appeal but remanded on sentencing; the Supreme Court denied certification.
Kenion filed a post-conviction relief (PCR) petition raising numerous ineffective-assistance and evidentiary/suppression claims; the PCR court denied relief without an evidentiary hearing.
On appeal from the PCR denial, the Appellate Division affirmed, finding Kenion failed to make prima facie showings of deficient performance or prejudice and many claims were procedurally barred or previously litigated.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial counsel failed to investigate and present medical expert testimony (ineffective assistance)	State: counsel adequately represented defendant; no showing an expert would have changed the outcome	Kenion: counsel should have obtained medical experts to challenge severity/causation of injuries	Held: No prima facie showing; no expert report or prejudice shown — claim rejected
Whether PCR counsel failed to develop pro se claims	State: PCR counsel investigated and advanced legitimate claims; certified communication with defendant	Kenion: PCR counsel did not adequately investigate or press his pro se allegations	Held: PCR counsel complied with Rule 3:22-6(d); claim denied
Whether PCR court failed to consider/rule on all claims or remand for evidentiary hearing	State: record lacked merit or was procedurally barred for many claims; prior appeals resolved several issues	Kenion: PCR court overlooked or failed to adjudicate certain claims (e.g., grand jury/exculpatory medical reports, juror removal)	Held: Court adequately addressed claims; many were barred by Rules 3:22-4 or 3:22-5 or lacked merit — no remand required
Fourth Amendment/suppression issues and validity of arrest/warrants	State: warrants and searches were supported; any discrepancies were not prejudicial	Kenion: trial counsel ineffectively allowed him to file pro se suppression motion; Detective Webb gave inconsistent testimony about plain view discovery	Held: No prejudice shown; suppression arguments previously rejected on direct appeal; claim lacks merit

Key Cases Cited

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two‑part test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
State v. Fritz, 105 N.J. 42 (adopts Strickland standard in New Jersey)
State v. Preciose, 129 N.J. 451 (procedural bars in PCR and exceptions)
State v. Nash, 212 N.J. 518 (PCR as last chance to challenge verdict)
State v. Harris, 181 N.J. 391 (appellate standard when no evidentiary hearing)
State v. O'Donnell, 435 N.J. Super. 351 (App. Div. 2014) (de novo review of documentary-record in PCR appeals)
State v. Cummings, 321 N.J. Super. 154 (prima facie PCR pleading requirements)
State v. Rue, 175 N.J. 1 (PCR counsel's duties to investigate and communicate)
State v. Webster, 187 N.J. 254 (PCR counsel may stand on brief if no meritorious elaboration exists)
State v. Hicks, 411 N.J. Super. 370 (PCR counsel must certify if no further argument warranted)