State v. Jones, 139 A.3d 1234

Background

Defendant pleaded guilty (March 14, 2013) to first-degree armed robbery and second-degree unlawful possession of a weapon and was sentenced to 15 years with 85% parole ineligibility under NERA; no direct appeal was filed.
Defendant filed a pro se PCR petition alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, including that counsel failed to file a direct appeal despite his instruction to do so; counsel was appointed for PCR proceedings.
At the PCR hearing, the judge rejected defendant’s sentencing-mitigation and Miranda claims without an evidentiary hearing and found no merit to the Miranda claim.
The judge also denied relief on the failure-to-appeal claim, concluding defendant had not shown any meritorious appellate claim and thus failed the prejudice prong of Strickland.
The appellate court reversed, holding Flores-Ortega presumes prejudice when a defendant’s undisputed sworn statement shows he directed counsel to file an appeal and counsel failed to do so, and ordered restoration of the right to file a direct appeal within 45 days.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to file a requested direct appeal	Trial court (plaintiff/state) argued defendant failed to show prejudice because no meritorious appellate claims existed	Defendant argued he expressly told counsel to appeal and counsel failed to file, so he was deprived of the right to appeal	Reversed: where a defendant’s sworn, undisputed instruction to file an appeal is shown, prejudice is presumed under Flores-Ortega and relief is required
Whether defendant needed to show meritorious or nonfrivolous grounds for the forfeited appeal	PCR judge required proof that an appeal would have had merit before finding prejudice	Defendant contended no such showing is required where he requested an appeal and counsel failed to file it	Held: Flores-Ortega presumes prejudice when a requested appeal was not filed; inquiry into merits is generally unnecessary where defendant instructed counsel to appeal
Whether an evidentiary hearing was required on the failure-to-appeal claim	State relied on the judge’s factual assessment and record	Defendant pointed to his undisputed sworn statement that he directed counsel to file an appeal	Held: No additional factual development needed as the prosecution did not dispute the sworn instruction; presumption of prejudice applies
Whether state constitutional standards require a different rule than Flores-Ortega	State did not argue for a broader state-law rule in this case	Defendant did not press a more expansive state-constitutional theory	Held: Federal Flores-Ortega standard controls here; state courts may adopt broader protections but that question was reserved

Key Cases Cited

Roe v. Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. 470 (2000) (presumption of prejudice when counsel fails to file an appeal requested by the defendant)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-pronged ineffective-assistance framework)
Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (1985) (prejudice inquiry under Strickland when plea-based challenges are raised)
Peguero v. United States, 526 U.S. 23 (1999) (presumption of prejudice in certain circumstances involving lost appeals)
Rodriguez v. United States, 395 U.S. 327 (1969) (remedy for defendants whose counsel frustrate appeal rights)
United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648 (1984) (circumstances allowing a presumption of prejudice for counsel failures)
Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) (Miranda rights cited regarding interrogation claim)
Hodge v. United States, 554 F.3d 372 (3d Cir. 2009) (discussing Flores-Ortega application and presumption of prejudice)