STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. SHERMAN MILLER (17-01-0026, ATLANTIC COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED), A-2258-20

Background

Defendant Sherman Miller pled guilty to one count (endangering the welfare of a child by permitting a child to engage in pornography) after admitting he persuaded a minor to film and share a sexual act; plea followed an indictment charging multiple related offenses.
At sentencing the prosecutor informed the court there were multiple victims (eight confirmed) and that defendant had sent unsolicited nude photos/videos to about forty-one minors; the judge relied on defendant's extensive prior record and Megan’s Law history.
The court imposed a 12-year NERA term, life parole supervision, and Megan’s Law conditions, citing aggravating factors (risk of recidivism, prior record/seriousness, and need for deterrence) and finding no mitigating factors.
Defendant did not file a direct appeal but filed a PCR petition claiming ineffective assistance of counsel at sentencing for failing to argue mitigating factors (4: substantial grounds tending to excuse; 11: excessive hardship to dependents), citing his troubled foster upbringing and a dependent child with Down syndrome.
The sentencing/PCR judge denied relief without an evidentiary hearing, finding defendant submitted no supporting affidavits, failed to make a prima facie showing of deficient performance or prejudice under Strickland/Fritz, and that even if counsel had argued the mitigation the sentence would not have changed due to the preponderant aggravating factors.
The Appellate Division affirmed, reviewing the record de novo and the denial of an evidentiary hearing for abuse of discretion, and concluding the lower court’s reasoning was thorough and dispositive.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether defendant established a prima facie claim of ineffective assistance of counsel at sentencing requiring an evidentiary hearing	State: defendant failed to show counsel's performance was objectively unreasonable or that prejudice resulted; no evidentiary basis presented	Miller: counsel failed to present/argue mitigating factors 4 and 11 (troubled upbringing; hardship to dependents), which could have reduced sentence	Denied: PCR court correctly found no prima facie IAC, lack of supporting affidavits, and that even if mitigation were argued the overwhelming aggravators precluded a different result; no hearing required

Key Cases Cited

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (established two‑prong ineffective‑assistance test: deficiency and prejudice)
State v. Fritz, 105 N.J. 42 (adopted Strickland standard in New Jersey)
State v. DiFrisco, 137 N.J. 434 (applies Strickland to challenges to guilty pleas)
Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (ineffective assistance claims in plea contexts require showing reasonable probability plea/sentence outcome would differ)
State v. Gaitan, 209 N.J. 339 (defendant bears burden by preponderance to prove IAC on PCR)
State v. Marshall, 148 N.J. 89 (standard for deciding whether an evidentiary hearing is required on PCR)
State v. Preciose, 129 N.J. 451 (PCR court views facts in light most favorable to defendant when determining need for hearing)
State v. Cummings, 321 N.J. Super. 154 (a prima facie PCR claim requires more than bald assertions; supporting affidavits/certifications expected)
State v. Hess, 207 N.J. 123 (failure to present mitigating evidence can be IAC when court deprived of information that might have led to lesser term)
State v. Blake, 444 N.J. Super. 285 (appellate review de novo of factual inferences when no evidentiary hearing was held)
State v. Brewster, 429 N.J. Super. 387 (abuse‑of‑discretion review of PCR court’s decision to deny an evidentiary hearing)