Suggs v. M & T Bank

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that the defendant in that case, who delayed twelve years before filing a PCR petition concerning deportation consequences, had not shown either excusable neglect or a fundamental injustice
• finding that petition alleging ineffective assistance of counsel was untimely filed under R. 3:22-12
• explaining that under Nuñez-Valdéz, warning a defendant he or she may be deported was not unreasonable advice or outside the norms of the profession and did not constitute prima facie proof of ineffective assistance of counsel
• holding the defendant's PCR petition was time-barred under Rule 3:22-12(a)(2)(B) because he \consulted an attorney in 2007 and was advised that his 1998 conviction 'could be a problem'\ yet waited until 2010 to seek post - conviction relief
• finding a \lapse of almost seven years beyond the five-year deadline undercuts a finding of excusable neglect and fundamental injustice\
• finding a lapse of almost seven years following the five-year deadline \undercuts a finding of excusable neglect and fundamental injustice\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).