STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. MAXIE CINTRON(10-06-0497, BURLINGTON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE), A-3874-15T4

Maxie Cintron was charged in a superseding indictment with attempted second-degree burglary, third-degree conspiracy, third-degree possession of a weapon for an unlawful purpose, and fourth-degree unlawful possession of a weapon; arrested with burglary tools and a folding knife near a targeted home.
He pleaded guilty (non-negotiated) to those counts based on the court’s representation his sentence would not exceed five years with 85% NERA parole ineligibility; he was extended-term eligible.
Sentence: five years on the burglary count (NERA parole ineligibility), concurrent five-year NERA terms on conspiracy and unlawful-purpose possession, and concurrent 18 months for unlawful possession.
On direct appeal, the panel affirmed the sentence but remanded to merge the weapons counts and the conspiracy and attempted burglary counts for sentencing purposes.
Cintron filed a timely PCR petition alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel (failure to file pretrial motions/ preserve appeals) and ineffective assistance of appellate counsel (failed to consult and raise requested issues). The trial court denied the PCR without an evidentiary hearing.
After the denial, the court of appeals applied Flores-Ortega/Jones and reversed the PCR denial as to appellate counsel: because Cintron expressly requested an appeal of his entire case but counsel limited the appeal to sentence issues, prejudice is presumed and Cintron must be allowed to file a direct appeal limited to his conviction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to file adequate pretrial motions and preserve issues for appeal	State: trial counsel’s omissions did not meet Preciose standards and defendant cannot show prejudice	Cintron: counsel failed to move to dismiss and preserve appealable issues, depriving him of meritorious relief	Court rejected this PCR claim; trial-counsel ineffective-assistance claim denied without evidentiary hearing
Whether appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to appeal Cintron’s convictions as he requested	State: Flores-Ortega inapplicable because appellate counsel did appeal sentence and counsel need not raise every client issue (Barnes/Gaither)	Cintron: he checked “appeal my entire case” and counsel nevertheless limited appeal to sentence, forfeiting his requested direct appeal	Court reversed PCR denial on this point: where defendant directs counsel to appeal the conviction and counsel fails to do so, Flores-Ortega/Jones presumes prejudice; Cintron may file a direct appeal of his conviction within 45 days

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective-assistance two-prong test)
Roe v. Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. 470 (presumed prejudice when counsel fails to file an instructed appeal)
Jones v. Barnes, 463 U.S. 745 (no duty to raise every colorable issue on appeal)
State v. Jones, 446 N.J. Super. 28 (appellate division applying Flores-Ortega; when counsel fails to file an instructed appeal prejudice is presumed)
State v. Gaither, 396 N.J. Super. 508 (failure to consult client about appeal may be deficient but requires prejudice showing)
State v. Carson, 227 N.J. 353 (recognizing Flores-Ortega as controlling where entire proceeding is forfeited)
State v. Preciose, 129 N.J. 451 (standard for PCR evidentiary hearing)