to be imposed by the ISP panel for the prior convictions and by the judge for the aggravated assault conviction, he awarded defendant 210 days’ jail credit for the delay in defendant’s sentencing for aggravated assault from February 17 to September 13, 2012. In fact, the State agreed that award of the 210 days’ jail credit was consistent with the plea agreement and does not challenge that award. II In Hernandez, the Court so significantly clarified “the manner in which jail credits, which are earned prior to the imposition of the first custodial sentence, are to be awarded with respect to multiple charges,” that the Court determined the decision should be applied “only prospectively to sentences imposed as of’ the day following issuance of its decision. 208 N.J. at 50-51, 26 A.3d 376 (<HOLDING>). Because Hernandez was decided on June 8,
recognizing rule recognizing that hernandez may be deemed inconsistent with prior interpretations of rule 3218 holding interpretation may not be inconsistent with regulation holding that a contract is ambiguous if a reasonable person would find it susceptible to different or inconsistent interpretations holding that interpretations of a statute which produce absurd results are to be avoided if alternative interpretations consistent with the legislative purpose are available