Appellate Court Backs Judge in Ross Case

TRENTON – Omar J. Ross pled guilty to second-degree robbery and third-degree burglary June 30, 2009, and was sentenced to six years with a period of parole ineligibility under the No Early Release Act on the robbery charge and consecutive four-year term on the burglary charge, with 50 percent of parole ineligibility on the burglary charge.
He is serving time at South Woods State Prison. In February 2014 he appealed for a change of custody, hoping to go into a substance abuse rehabilitation facility, and to have the sentences served concurrently. A decision was returned by the Appellate Court Feb. 20, upholding Ross’ prior judicial orders.
The 40-year-old burglarized an unoccupied dwelling in North Wildwood Feb. 28, 2008, and Feb. 29, 2008 in the early morning, broke into the home of a 91-year-old, demanded money and car keys and drove away with the victim’s car.
A State Police trooper stopped the vehicle at milepost 8.4 northbound on Garden State Parkway, and Ross was arrested.
In May 2011, Ross moved for a change in custody, seeking transfer to a substance abuse rehabilitation facility. Superior Court Judge Raymond Batten denied the motion. “Concluding defendant had not completed the ordered parole ineligibility period. The judge also denied his motion for reconsideration of the sentence, as out of time, under (a rule of the court),” according to the appellate decision.
Again, on Nov. 9, 2012, Batten heard Ross’ motion for reconsideration of sentence and denied the motion. “The judge found not only that the motion was time-barred, pursuant to (a rule of the court), but that defendant was not eligible for a change of sentence…because he had not established that he was an addict, or that a bed in a rehabilitation facility was available and waiting for him.”
That order was entered Dec. 4, 2012.
On Dec. 6, 2012, after oral argument on Ross’ petition for post-conviction relief, Batten issued an oral decision denying that relief.
Ross’ petition asserted:
• His sentence should have been concurrent rather than consecutive.
• Proceedings should have been moved to another county.
• He was never given an opportunity to be heard on a consolidation motion.
• He never received an opportunity for drug treatment.
Further, he claimed that his counsel had been “ineffective for failing to raise these arguments in previous proceedings.” Batten found “no merit to any of the claimed and ruled that all of (Ross’) argument failed.”
Ross filed a motion Dec. 18, 2012 seeking a change of custody into special probation. Again, Batten determined Ross “failed to provide evidence that ‘a suitable treatment facility had agreed to provide him with appropriate treatment services.’”
Further the judge stated he “Cannot conclude from the evidence…that (Ross) poses no danger to the community if placed on special probation.” Batten’s decision was memorialized March 1, 2013.
After consideration, the Appellate Court panel concluded Ross’ arguments, “Are without sufficient merit to warrant discussion in a written opinion.” The court also affirmed Batten’s oral opinions rendered Nov. 9 and Dec. 6, 2012 and Feb. 21, 2013.
“Upon our review of the record, we discern no basis to disturb that result,” the court wrote. “The remainder of defendant’s contentions, including his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, lack sufficient merit to warrant discussion in this opinion. Affirmed.”
For previous coverage, go to:
– Trooper Nabs Home Invasion, Robbery Suspect: http://goo.gl/R4evIH