A Hudson County Superior Court ruling that threw out a Jersey City murder conviction and a lifetime prison sentence because of ineffective counsel has been upheld by a state appellate court panel.
The latest decision, released Wednesday, means 33-year-old Justin Garcia may be retried in theJuly 21, 2016 fatal shooting of Javon Murray, 28, on Clinton Avenue. The Hudson County Prosecutor’s Office said it is reviewing the appellate court’s opinion, but declined to comment further.
Garcia wasconvicted in March 2018, mostly on circumstantial evidence and accounts by witnesses who had altered their versions of the events of the incident. Throughout his trial and sentencing, Garcia had maintained his innocence.
The 26-page appellate court decision notes that the state presented 10 witnesses and introduced into evidence more than 100 exhibits, but no one witnessed the shooting, the weapon was not recovered and no projectiles or shell casings were found at the scene.
Garcia’s attorney, who had been a “pool attorney” for the Office of the Public Defender, did not call a single person to testify at the trial, even though he had issued subpoenas for four of them.
Garcia’s post-conviction relief (PCR) appeal for the verdict to be tossed was granted by Judge Jeffrey Jablonski based on evidence that Garcia’s attorney was ineffective at the trial, and the Hudson County Prosecutor’s Office then appealed that decision.
The appellate panel did not rule on Garcia’s guilt or innocence, but stated that it was clear Garcia did not receive a fair trial because of his attorney’s failures to question witnesses who had varying accounts of the incident, in which two men were in the vicinity of the victim at the time of the shooting.
The prosecutor’s office argued in its appeal that witnesses the defense attorney could have called to testify would not have provided relevant information and that Jablonski mischaracterized one witness’ testimony as “diametrically opposed” to another witness.
The appellate panel rejected that argument and noted there was enough testimony that was not heard at trial to merit a new trial. The panel pointed out that Garcia’s attorney, questioned at the PCR hearing, had no strategic reason for not calling witnesses.
