STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. MIGUEL MARTINEZ

 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-3799-05T13799-05T1

STATE OF NEW JERSEY,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

MIGUEL MARTINEZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

_______________________________________

 

Submitted April 18, 2007 - Decided May 3, 2007

Before Judges Wefing and Yannotti.

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Hudson County, Indictment No. 0124-01-91.

Miguel Martinez, appellant pro se.

Edward J. De Fazio, Hudson County Prosecutor, attorney for respondent (Seth P. Galkin, Assistant Prosecutor, on the brief).

PER CURIAM

Defendant Miguel Martinez appeals from an order entered on January 25, 2006, denying his petition for post-conviction relief (PCR). We affirm.

Defendant was charged under a Hudson County indictment with murder, N.J.S.A. 2C:11-3a(1) or (2) (count one); felony murder, N.J.S.A. 2C:11-3a(3) (count two); armed robbery, N.J.S.A. 2C:15-1 (count three); possession of weapons for an unlawful purpose, N.J.S.A. 2C:39-4d (counts four and five); possession of weapons under circumstances not manifestly appropriate for their lawful use, N.J.S.A. 2C:39-5d (counts six and seven).

Defendant was tried to a jury and convicted on all counts. Defendant was sentenced on June 20, 1991. The judge merged count two with count one and imposed a life term of imprisonment, with a thirty-year period of parole ineligibility. The judge also merged counts four through seven with count three and sentenced defendant to a fifteen-year concurrent term of imprisonment.

Defendant appealed and we affirmed his conviction and sentences. State v. Martinez, A-6262-90T4 (App. Div. October 22, 1992). Defendant filed a petition for certification with the Supreme Court, which was denied on January 20, 1993. State v. Martinez, 133 N.J. 430 (1993). Defendant thereafter filed his first petition for PCR, which was withdrawn. The record before us does not disclose when defendant filed this second petition for PCR. The judge issued a letter opinion dated January 24, 2006, in which he concluded that the petition was without merit. An order was entered on January 25, 2006, denying PCR relief and this appeal followed.

Defendant raises the following argument for our consideration:

N.J.S.A. 2C:11-3b(1) IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL IN THAT IT ALLOWS FOR UNEQUAL TREATMENT AMONGST DEFENDANTS WHO ARE CONVICTED AND SENTENCED FOR MURDER, IN VIOLATION OF THE STATE AND FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONS, WHEREFORE IT MUST BE STRUCK DOWN AS BEING UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Having carefully reviewed the record in light of the contentions advanced on appeal, we are convinced that the appeal is entirely without merit. We therefore affirm substantially for the reasons stated by the judge in his January 24, 2006, letter opinion. We add the following brief comments.

Defendant argues that his life sentence, with a thirty-year period of parole ineligibility, is unconstitutional. He maintains that N.J.S.A. 2C:11-3b(1) allows arbitrary and capricious treatment of offenders without uniformity. Defendant asserts that the statute is unconstitutional because some defendants receive thirty years without parole and have a history of serious crime whereas others with "far less or no criminal histories" receive the same sentence. We disagree.

As the trial judge stated in his letter opinion, defendant's contentions fail in light of our decision in State v. Johnson, 206 N.J. Super. 341 (App. Div. 1985), certif. denied, 104 N.J. 382 (1986). In Johnson, the defendant argued that the mandatory minimum sentence required by N.J.S.A. 2C:11-3b was unconstitutional because it precluded the sentencing court from considering individualized factors in mitigation of the mandated sentence. Id. at 343.

We rejected the defendant's arguments in Johnson, noting that "[m]andatory sentencing schemes, which have not allowed for consideration of individualized factors, have withstood the judicial scrutiny of the courts of this State." Id. at 346. We held that the minimum sentence for murder mandated by N.J.S.A. 2C:11-3b does not violate either the Federal or State constitutions. Id. at 349.

The Johnson decision therefore makes clear that defendant's sentence suffers from no constitutional infirmity. That being so, defendant failed to establish any basis for PCR relief in this matter.

Affirmed.

 

(continued)

(continued)

4

A-3799-05T1

 

May 3, 2007