STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. DARNELL STEWART (05-08-3205, CAMDEN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE), A-5142-14T4

Background

In June 2006 a jury convicted Darnell Stewart of kidnapping and aggravated sexual assault based on the victim’s testimony, in-court and photo-array identifications, and DNA matching defendant to vaginal/cervical samples; he was sentenced to an aggregate 60-year term with 60 years parole ineligibility.
At the hospital within an hour of the assault, multiple swabs were collected (vaginal, cervical, anal, external genital, dried secretions); the State tested vaginal and cervical samples and matched DNA to Stewart but did not test several other collected specimens.
Trial defense strategy emphasized that the attacker could not achieve an erection or ejaculate; counsel did not call the defendant to testify (avoiding impeachment by his prior convictions) and declined to seek testing of the additional untested specimens.
Post-conviction, Stewart (pro se and later with counsel) alleged trial counsel was ineffective for failing to test the additional specimens and for not pursuing a Rape Shield hearing to admit evidence of prior consensual sex; he also sought post-conviction DNA testing of the untested specimens.
The PCR court denied relief and the DNA-testing motion, finding (1) counsel’s decision not to test was a reasonable strategic choice, (2) Stewart failed to make a prima facie showing of ineffective assistance or prejudice under Strickland/Fritz, and (3) the untested specimens were not ‘‘newly discovered’’ evidence so Stewart could not meet the statutory requirements for post-conviction DNA testing.
The Appellate Division affirmed, relying principally on the PCR court’s reasoning that the choice not to test was strategic and testing would not likely entitle Stewart to a new trial given the existing DNA results and victim identifications.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether defendant met N.J.S.A. 2A:84A-32a(d) requirements for post-conviction DNA testing	State: additional testing not required because existing DNA and ID evidence foreclose reasonable probability of a new trial	Stewart: untested specimens could show another man’s DNA, creating a material dispute on identity and a reasonable probability of a new-trial	Denied — specimens were known at trial; testing would not likely produce newly-discovered evidence entitling to a new trial
Whether trial counsel was ineffective for not requesting DNA testing of additional specimens	State: counsel’s failure was a reasonable, strategic decision to avoid creating evidence the State could use and to preserve a non-testimony defense	Stewart: counsel should have obtained DNA testing/expert to support a prior-consent theory and to challenge identity	Denied — counsel’s choice was reasonable strategy; no prima facie ineffective-assistance showing under Strickland/Fritz
Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to pursue a Rape Shield hearing to admit prior consensual sex evidence	State: defendant’s claimed prior-consent story was belated and unsupported; counsel lacked a factual basis to pursue the hearing	Stewart: failure to seek the hearing prevented admission of evidence that would support his identity defense	Denied — the alleged prior sexual encounter surfaced years after trial; defendant failed to show counsel was informed and lacked supporting affidavits
Whether an evidentiary hearing was required on the PCR petition	State: no hearing necessary because defendant failed to make a prima facie showing of ineffectiveness or material disputed facts outside the record	Stewart: factual disputes and new DNA information warrant an evidentiary hearing	Denied — court found no prima facie showing and no disputed material facts requiring a hearing

Key Cases Cited

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishing two-pronged ineffective assistance standard)
State v. Fritz, 105 N.J. 42 (applying Strickland in New Jersey)
State v. Cummings, 321 N.J. Super. 154 (requirements for prima facie PCR claims and need for affidavits/certifications)
State v. Porter, 216 N.J. 343 (standards for evidentiary hearing on PCR)
State v. Preciose, 129 N.J. 451 (review standard for denial of PCR without hearing)
State v. Relden, 373 N.J. Super. 396 (post-conviction DNA testing—materiality and impact analysis)
State v. Ways, 180 N.J. 171 (standards for new trial based on newly discovered evidence)
State v. Carter, 85 N.J. 300 (test for newly discovered evidence warranting new trial)