Camacho v. Commissioner of Correction.
2014 WL 712961
Conn. App. Ct.2014Background
- Camacho was convicted of multiple crimes including four murders and related offenses; he received a 260-year term.
- A 911 tape of the victim’s call was admitted at trial and replayed in closing; trial objections were raised but the tape was admitted.
- The defense later argued on appeal that appellate counsel was ineffective for not challenging the 911 tape's admissibility and for not challenging references to the nickname 'Killer'.
- Pretrial, the court had excluded references to the nickname; during trial the nickname appeared via a witness and again later via the prosecutor, prompting mistrial motions and curative instructions.
- The habeas court denied the petition; on review, the appellate issue is whether appellate counsel's decisions (to focus on other issues) were reasonable strategy under Strickland.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance for failing to challenge 911 tape. | Camacho | Commissioner | No error; strategy reasonable; no ineffective assistance |
| Ineffective assistance for failing to challenge nickname reference. | Camacho | Commissioner | No error; strategy reasonable; no ineffective assistance |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1984) (two-part test for ineffective assistance of counsel; deficient performance and prejudice)
- Mozell v. Commissioner of Correction, 87 Conn. App. 560 (Conn. App. Ct. 2005) (reasonable-ness and preservation principles for appellate counsel)
- Moody v. Commissioner of Correction, 127 Conn. App. 293 (Conn. App. Ct. 2011) (reasonable probability standard for success on direct appeal)
- State v. Camacho, 282 Conn. 328 (Conn. 2007) (direct appeal context and issues surrounding 911 tape and nickname references)
- State v. Williams, 41 Conn. App. 180 (Conn. App. Ct. 1996) (cumulative error and curative instruction effectiveness)