Coleman v. Commissioner of Correction
46 A.3d 1050
Conn. App. Ct.2012Background
- Coleman, a self-represented petitioner, filed a habeas corpus petition alleging abusive conditions of confinement and torture while imprisoned.
- He previously was convicted after a jury trial of multiple offenses and his conviction appeal was affirmed by this court in 2007.
- During a hunger strike, prison officials sought and obtained a temporary and then a permanent injunction allowing force-feeding of Coleman.
- On December 30, 2010, Coleman filed the present habeas petition, along with requests for counsel and fee waiver; the petition was later sua sponte dismissed by the habeas court.
- The court granted and later vacated counsel for Coleman; Coleman appealed the dismissal challenging lack of a hearing and failure to appoint counsel.
- The court affirmed the dismissal, holding the petition failed to state a cognizable habeas claim and that no appointment of counsel was required under the circumstances.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the petition properly dismissed without a hearing? | Coleman asserts dismissal without a hearing was an abuse of discretion. | Coleman’s petition contains only conclusory allegations lacking cognizable claims. | Yes; dismissal without a hearing was proper. |
| Was counsel properly not appointed for Coleman? | Petition challenges conditions of confinement; complex and prejudicial without counsel. | Petition did not arise from a criminal matter and there was no entitlement to counsel; § 51-296 not applicable. | Yes; no appointment of counsel required. |
Key Cases Cited
- Faraday v. Commissioner of Correction, 95 Conn. App. 1 (Conn. App. 2006) (requires showing objectively serious conditions and deliberate indifference)
- Mitchell v. Commissioner of Correction, 93 Conn. App. 719 (Conn. App. 2006) (no hearing when prior grounds denied unless new facts)
- Mercer v. Commissioner of Correction, 230 Conn. 88 (Conn. 1994) (petitioner entitled to hearing and evidence in habeas context)
- Abed v. Commissioner of Correction, 43 Conn. App. 176 (Conn. App. 1996) (pleading standards for habeas petitions; accept allegations as true)
- Kaddah v. Commissioner of Correction, 299 Conn. 129 (Conn. 2010) (pleading must plead facts, not mere conclusions, to entitle relief)
- Doe v. Yale University, 252 Conn. 641 (Conn. 2000) (pleadings requirement; distinguish conclusions from facts)
- Joyce v. Commissioner of Correction, 129 Conn. App. 37 (Conn. App. 2011) (habeas corpus as bulwark against unfair confinement; statutory counsel right for indigents)