The judge

also

noted that the DNA tests ruling out

defendant as the father of S.A.’s child were "not dispositive,"
since S.A. admitted having a sexual partner at the time. The
judge did not address the earlier analysis that excluded
defendant as a DNA contributor to the vaginal slides.
The judge found trial counsel to be "a credible witness."
He noted that counsel "categorically denied telling [defendant]
that he personally spoke to the victim who confirmed the
identification of [defendant] as her attacker." The judge also
concluded that defendant had failed to demonstrate trial counsel
provided ineffective assistance.
The judge stated:
It is obvious to even the most casual
observer that this application by
[defendant] is a blatant attempt to withdraw
a voluntarily entered plea, whose sentence
has already been served, solely to enhance
his efforts to have his status as a Sexually
Violent Predator reconsidered based on the
deletion of this conviction from his
Criminal history.
In short, petitioner has failed to meet
the heavy burden of proof that but for his
counsel’s performance, the result would have
been any different.
The record is entirely barren of any
proof of petitioner’s allegations.
The judge entered an order denying defendant’s petition, and
this appeal ensued.

12

-1186-10T3