Brian S. v. Commissioner of Correction, 160 A.3d 1110

Petitioner Brian S. was convicted of multiple sexual‑assault and risk‑of‑injury crimes based on his minor daughter's testimony and medical evidence showing a full‑thickness hymenal tear observed via colposcopic exam. His convictions were affirmed on direct appeal.
He filed an amended habeas petition alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel (Jeffrey Beck) for failing to consult, retain, and present a forensic pediatric gynecologist to challenge the state’s medical evidence.
At the criminal trial the state’s expert (Dr. Kavle) testified to a hymenal tear consistent with blunt‑force trauma; the colposcopic exam video was shown to the jury.
Trial counsel testified at the habeas hearing that he consulted Dr. Bernard Luck, an experienced gynecologist who reviewed the report and video and confirmed blunt‑force trauma; counsel elected to focus the defense on victim fabrication and inconsistent statements rather than present Luck.
At the habeas trial the petitioner presented Dr. Jennifer Canter (board‑certified in child abuse pediatrics), who disagreed with Luck and Kavle, opining the hymen appeared normal; Luck did not testify at the habeas hearing.
The habeas court found counsel’s performance was not deficient because counsel reasonably relied on Luck’s opinion and made a strategic choice to emphasize fabrication; the court denied the habeas petition and this Court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to consult, retain, or present a forensic pediatric gynecologist to challenge the state’s colposcopic medical evidence	Brian: Counsel was deficient for not securing or presenting an expert with specific forensic child‑abuse expertise, which prevented effective challenge of the medical evidence	Commissioner: Counsel consulted Dr. Luck, a gynecologist with child‑abuse experience; reliance on that expert and the tactical choice to highlight fabrication were reasonable	Court: Held counsel’s performance was not deficient — consulting Luck and choosing a fabrication strategy were reasonable strategic decisions; petitioner failed Strickland performance prong

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (ineffective assistance standard: performance and prejudice prongs)
Michael T. v. Commissioner of Correction, 319 Conn. 623 (Conn. 2015) (standards of review and Strickland discussion in Connecticut habeas context)
Santos v. Commissioner of Correction, 151 Conn. App. 776 (Conn. App. 2014) (trial counsel not per se required to present expert; failure may be strategic)
Hinton v. Alabama, 134 S. Ct. 1081 (U.S. 2014) (limits on comparing relative qualifications of experts in ineffective‑assistance analysis)
Stephen S. v. Commissioner of Correction, 134 Conn. App. 801 (Conn. App. 2012) (counsel entitled to rely on consulted expert and to decline to present testimony if not beneficial)