Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Abdul S. Aziz v. New Jersey
IFP petition · Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, No. A-4795-17T3 · judgment November 24, 2020
Certiorari denied · October 4, 2021
Questions presented
- Was error Committed by the Appellate Division when it neglected to consider Appellant’s Pro- Se Supplemental Brief, or to file said brief considering the Circumstances .(Covid - 19, Ineffective Appellate Counsel) 2). Should Remand be ordered in relation to failed plea bargain negotiations R. 3:9-3 , R. 3:9- 1 3). Was defense counsels failure to present any strategic or tactical defense theory below the standard of proficient representation . 4). Did the States use of perjured testimony, and edited Surveillance footage, deprive defendant of a fair Trial when that surveillance footage disappeared for two and one half years before state introduced or acknowledged its existence 5). Should information supplied by the Police be both factual and legally sufficient , as opposed to the misleading and absent of pertinent facts. 6). Should text messages that are only partial bits and pieces of a conversation and overwhelmingly prejudicial and affirmatively misleading be allowed into evidence if they also violate the doctrine of completeness. 7). Has the trial court abused and overstepped its authority when it allowed Illegally obtained evidence via Police Misconduct and violation of Constitutional right, previously suppressed by the Appellate Division into evidence, now calling it “Inevitable Discovery” 8). Should the Grand Jury Indictment stand when defendant’s Constitutional right not to be a witness against himself in a Criminal prosecution has been violated 9). Once an individual states “I DO NOT WANT TO GET INVOLVED” has all consent therefore been immediately, effectively withdrawn regarding a warrantless consent search. 10). Has the trial court deprived defendant of presenting “HIS DEFENSE” when it refused to allow sworn affidavits of events to Jurors at trial unless stipulation of testimony is agreed to by defendant. 11). Should conviction stand with the state’s use of perjured testimony and tampered evidence. 12). With the state not meeting its burden of proving the requirement of Premeditation, for knowingly and purposeful murder pursuant to 2C:2-2[3b] beyond a reasonable doubt, how has the Appellate Division allowed that conviction to remain when it is clear the Jurors failed in performing their duties. 13). Why are their two standards / levels of “proof’ for beyond a reasonable doubt, when it comes to a Black man facing a Murder charge in the State of New Jersey especially where the case is mainly circumstantial. 14). Although text messages show some dissatisfaction of the situation between Abdul- Aziz and Jackson , it clearly does not establish any pre- disposition for the commission of a crime. Yet, the Jurors were not instructed as to how the text messages were to be used. And wrongly allowed to assume premeditation . Therefore, should the text messages have been allowed at trial without specific direction by the court, being they only served to prejudice the defendant unfairly. 15). Has the Appellate court erred in waiving or deferring its review authority by merely conceding with the trial Judge Personal conclusions contrary of law regarding sentence, Past criminal history, Aggravating, Mitigating , and the totality of the circumstances
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Abdul S. Aziz
For respondent
Michele C. Buckley
Union County Prosecutor's Office
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- Oct 04 2021Petition DENIED.
- Sep 01 2021Waiver of right of respondent State of New Jersey to respond filed.
- Jul 22 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
- May 19 2021Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 8, 2021)