Cole v. Commissioner of Correction, 12 A.3d 1065

Arthur Cole appeals from a habeas judgment denying his petition alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel.
Two bank robberies on April 29, 1996 in New Haven; charges included robbery in the first degree with a firearm as an accessory, conspiracy to commit robbery in the first degree, larceny in the second degree as an accessory, and coercion.
Jury trial; coercion acquitted, other counts convicted; total sentence = 40 years.
Petition challenged trial counsel for not adequately investigating the scene and failing to call witnesses; and for not adequately advising risks of trial and potential sentence.
Habeas court rejected both claims; credibility determinations led to denial of relief and of certification to appeal; appellate review challenges only the trial counsel claim under credibility findings.
Appellate court dismissed the appeal, upholding the habeas court’s credibility-based decision.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial counsel's handling of the plea offer deprived Cole of effective assistance	Cole argues counsel failed to explain risks and max exposure.	Cole refused any incarceration-inclusive offers; counsel informed of 80-year exposure.	No error; credibility findings support no deficient performance or prejudice.
Whether the habeas court abused its discretion in denying certification to appeal	Cole contends cert. should be granted for appellate review of trial counsel performance.	Judge's credibility determinations warrant denial of relief.	No abuse; credibility-based denial upheld.

Joseph v. Commissioner of Correction, 117 Conn.App. 431 (2009) (credibility of witnesses is for the habeas court to determine)
Kiniry v. Kiniry, 299 Conn. 308 (2010) (questions of witness credibility are reviewable only to a limited degree)
James L. v. Commissioner of Correction, 245 Conn. 132 (1998) (habeas court may decide to hear petition on the merits in discretion)