Carter v. Commissioner of Correction
133 Conn. App. 387
| Conn. App. Ct. | 2012Background
- Petitioner Anthony Carter was convicted in 2002 of assault in the first degree, attempt to commit assault in the first degree, risk of injury to a child, and criminal possession of a firearm, and received a 27-year sentence.
- This Court affirmed the conviction, including holding that the evidence showed Carter shot the victim and caused injuries with a firearm.
- Carter filed multiple habeas petitions (2004, 2007, 2007 Brady-related, 2010), with varying claims and outcomes, including denials and denials of certification.
- The fourth petition (January 29, 2010) alleged ineffective assistance of sentencing counsel, insufficient evidence of injuries and firearm possession, and insufficiency of evidence of an act likely to injure the victim, and was dismissed as successive and barred by res judicata.
- Carter challenged the dismissal, arguing some claims were not properly barred and that at least the sentencing claim merited an evidentiary hearing, particularly the claim about restoring sentence-review rights.
- The habeas court ultimately upheld most dismissals but reversed as to the sentencing-rights claim, remanding for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are the insufficiency-of-evidence claims barred? | Carter argues those claims are not the same as prior ones and should be heard on the merits. | Commissioner contends the claims are barred as res judicata/successive. | Barred; claims barred by res judicata. |
| Does the prior direct-appeal finding on sufficiency foreclose current claims? | Carter asserts new framing of the same underlying issue warrants review. | Respondent relies on prior appellate finding to bar current claims. | Foreclosed; prior finding resolves current sufficiency claims. |
| Is the claim of ineffective assistance of sentencing counsel preserved for hearing when seeking restoration of sentence-review rights? | Carter seeks restoration of sentence-review rights as a distinct form of relief. | Claims are procedurally improper as abuse of the writ or duplicative. | Reversed in part; remanded for evidentiary hearing on this claim. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Carter, 84 Conn.App. 263 (2004) (sufficiency of evidence for assault and firearm use)
- Diaz v. Commissioner of Correction, 125 Conn.App. 57 (2010) (habeas corpus res judicata limitations in constitutional claims)
- McClendon v. Commissioner of Correction, 93 Conn.App. 228 (2006) (successive petitions; new relief requirement and availability)
- James L. v. Commissioner of Correction, 245 Conn. 132 (1998) (grounding for differentiating claims and relief types)
- Myers v. Commissioner of Correction, 111 Conn.App. 405 (2008) (identical grounds may be proven by different factual allegations yet same legal basis)