STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. KAHSEEM ALLAH-SHABAZZ (16-07-0635, PASSAIC COUNTY AND STATEWIDE), A-2837-18

On November 6, 2015, defendant Kahseem Allah-Shabazz committed three armed robberies in Paterson, pointing a handgun and stealing victims' cell phones; a grand jury indicted him on three first-degree robbery counts and fourteen related weapons and drug counts.
On April 13, 2017, defendant pled guilty to three first-degree robbery counts in exchange for three concurrent 10-year NERA terms, dismissal of remaining counts, equitable jail credit, and concurrent running with a federal sentence; plea colloquy established a factual basis and waiver of rights.
Sentencing on June 5, 2017 imposed the agreed terms; judge found multiple aggravating factors and no mitigating factors; defendant did not directly appeal.
Defendant filed a pro se PCR petition (Oct. 11, 2017) alleging ineffective assistance for failure to file a Wade suppression motion and moved post-sentencing to withdraw his plea; counsel was appointed and an evidentiary hearing was held.
At the hearing, trial counsel Pomaco testified he had full discovery (including a report noting the perpetrators wore masks), advised defendant of risks, and strategically declined a Wade motion because the prosecutor would revoke the plea; the PCR judge credited counsel and denied relief.
The Appellate Division affirmed, concluding counsel’s performance was reasonable, defendant failed to show prejudice or a meritorious suppression claim, and the plea withdrawal motion lacked a showing of manifest injustice.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether PCR erred in denying ineffective-assistance claim for failing to file a Wade motion	Counsel acted competently and strategically after reviewing full discovery; not filing Wade preserved a favorable plea	Counsel failed to file Wade despite defendant's requests; IDs would be suppressible and defendant would have gone to trial	PCR credited counsel, found performance reasonable, defendant failed to show prejudice or a meritorious suppression claim; claim denied
Whether the guilty plea was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent / whether plea should be withdrawn	Plea colloquy and plea form show defendant knowingly waived rights and admitted guilt; plea was a favorable negotiated bargain and no manifest injustice shown	Plea was involuntary due to counsel pressure, withheld discovery, and lack of motion practice; would not have pled if he had seen witness statements	Plea was knowing and voluntary; no colorable innocence or fair-and-just reason to withdraw; motion denied
Whether a Wade suppression motion would likely succeed (merits of ID suppression)	Even if masks were used, victims’ descriptions and corroborating circumstantial evidence undercut suppression; filing Wade risked plea revocation	Victim statements about masks undermined identifications and would have supported suppression	Defendant failed to prove admissibility challenge meritorious; strategic decision to avoid Wade was reasonable

Nuñez-Valdéz, 200 N.J. 129 (ineffective-assistance standard for pleas)
DiFrisco, 137 N.J. 434 (Strickland framework applied in New Jersey)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two-part test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (prejudice must be rational under circumstances)
Fisher, 156 N.J. 494 (requirement to show meritorious suppression claim when counsel fails to file motion)
Kimmelman v. Morrison, 477 U.S. 365 (need to prove merit of Fourth Amendment claim when alleging failure to litigate suppression)
Slater, 198 N.J. 145 (factors for post-sentencing plea withdrawal)
United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218 (precedent governing out-of-court identification challenges)