Whether a decision affirming exclusion of evidence can be correct without addressing the unrefuted assertion that it was excluded on plainly erroneous grounds and was in fact admissible

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 1. WHETHER A DECISION AFFIRMING EXCLUSION OF EVIDENCE, IN THIS CASE A TRANSCRIPT, CAN BE CORRECT IF . UNINFORMED AS TO THE TRANSCRIPT’ S ACTUAL CONTENTS, . AND SO WITH NO BASIS ON WHICH TO ASSESS THE MERITS OF : : DEFENDANT’S UNDISPUTED ASSERTION THAT THIS EVIDENCE . EXPOSES THE TESTIMONY OF THE STATE’S SOLE WITNESS AS : COMPLETE PERJURY 2. WHETHER A DECISION AFFIRMING EXCLUSION OF EVIDENCE CAN BE CORRECT WITHOUT ACTUALLY ADDRESSING THE UNREFUTED ASSERTION THAT IT WAS EXCLUDED ON PLAINLY ERRONEOUS : GROUNDS AND WAS IN FACT ADMISSIBLE 3. WHEN AN ISSUE WAS RAISED ON APPEAL, WHETHER RULE 3:22: 5 IS TO BE APPLIED TO AUTOMATICALLY BAR A POST . CONVICTION RELIEF CLAIM THAT IT HAD BEEN RAISED IN AN ‘ INEFFECTIVE MANNER 4. IN A CASE WHERE A PCR PETITION PRESENTED FOR THE FIRST TIME (POST-TRIAL) EVIDENCE THAT HE CLAIMS ESTABLISHES THAT HIS CONVICTION WAS BASED ON PERJURY, WHETHER THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE CALLS FOR RELAXATION OF R. 3:22-5 IN ORDER TO CONSIDER THE MERITS OF THE SAID CLAIM