STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. JOSEPH MAGGIOÂ (83-03-0450, MIDDLESEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE), A-3126-15T3

In 1983 a Middlesex County grand jury indicted Joseph Maggio for armed robbery, burglary, theft, unlawful/intentional possession of a handgun, and terroristic threats (Indictment No. 83-03-0450).
Maggio was serving lengthy New York sentences for attempted murder; under the IAD he was transported to New Jersey to stand trial in 1984 and was convicted by a jury of armed robbery (first degree), burglary (second), theft (third), and terroristic threats (third).
The trial court imposed an extended life sentence for the robbery (persistent offender) consecutive to his New York sentences; this Court affirmed the convictions on direct appeal and merged the theft count into the robbery conviction.
Maggio filed multiple post-conviction and habeas proceedings over the years; one earlier PCR/habeas effort was denied in federal court, and other PCR proceedings are of uncertain disposition.
In 2013 Maggio filed the PCR petition at issue, alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel for failing to investigate and call an alleged alibi witness; he offered no corroborating records or affidavits.
The PCR court held the petition procedurally barred under Rule 3:22-4(a), reviewed the claim on the merits, found Maggio failed to make a prima facie showing of ineffective assistance under Strickland/Fritz, and denied relief without an evidentiary hearing; the Appellate Division affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Maggio)	Held
Whether Maggio's 2013 PCR petition is procedurally barred under Rule 3:22-4(a)	The petition is untimely/raises grounds previously available; Rule 3:22-4(a) bars the claim	The petition should not be barred because the claim (failure to call an alibi witness) is new and merits review	The court held the petition was procedurally barred and no exception applied
Whether Maggio established a prima facie ineffective-assistance claim (failure to investigate/call an alibi witness) entitling him to an evidentiary hearing under Strickland/Fritz	Maggio failed to present corroborating evidence or records showing counsel neglected investigation or that the alibi witness existed	Maggio argued counsel was ineffective for not locating/calling the alleged alibi witness and that an evidentiary hearing was required to develop the claim	The court held Maggio did not make a prima facie showing of prejudice or deficient performance and therefore was not entitled to an evidentiary hearing; PCR denial affirmed

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two-prong ineffective-assistance test: deficient performance and prejudice)
State v. Fritz, 105 N.J. 42 (Adopts Strickland standard in New Jersey practice)
State v. Preciose, 129 N.J. 451 (describes standard for entitlement to an evidentiary hearing on PCR claims)
State v. Pero, 370 N.J. Super. 203 (discusses IAD transportation/consent context cited in procedural history)
State v. Maggio, 109 N.J. 54 (Supreme Court order cited regarding denial of certification following direct appeal)