Whether the New Jersey Supreme Court's decision in State v. W.B should be retroactively applied to the petitioner's case

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED ; The question in the case is whether, the New Jersey Supreme Court’s decision in State v. W.B that clarified discovery rule 3:13-3, holding that the pre-indictment destruction of police interview notes may entitle a defendant to an adverse inference charge, should be retroactively applied to the petitioner’s case in his third petition for post-conviction relief, and or entitled to a new trial on the basis of a new factual predicate pursuant to rule 3:22-4(b) (2) (a) (b) since defendant's trial attorney raised and : preserved for review the similar issue regarding a police officer destroying his pre-interview notes of defendant prior to his indictment that , and whether applying W.B prospectively to only pre-indictment cases is contrary to this court’s decision in Teague v. Lane that held in part, that “an old rule applies on direct and collateral review. This petition. presents. issyesof public importance that should be settled by this court, anci te cegely 2 avr bea pe rtant consthhehona f 4 uLshon OF fies t Impre $5107 + . : 1 .