Colon v. Commissioner of Correction, 177 A.3d 1162

Petitioner Hector Colon pleaded guilty in 2008 (Hartford cases) to multiple felonies under a plea agreement calling for a total effective sentence of 25–30 years, with the defense permitted to argue for less than 25. Exposure at trial on those counts was 150 years.
After the Hartford pleas but before sentencing, Colon met with police (outside trial counsel Cardwell’s presence) to provide cooperation in hopes of reducing his sentence; he later discharged Cardwell and retained Aaron Romano.
In 2009 Colon pleaded guilty in a separate Middlesex (Middletown) case to robbery, burglary and second‑degree kidnapping with a firearm; those counts exposed him to up to 60 years but were to run concurrently with the Hartford sentence.
The trial court imposed a total effective sentence of 27½ years.
About six years later Colon filed a habeas petition alleging ineffective assistance by Cardwell for (1) failing to adequately explain the state’s plea offer and (2) failing to prepare/oversee Colon’s cooperation meeting with law enforcement. The habeas court denied relief and refused certification to appeal.
On appeal from denial of certification, the Appellate Court dismissed, concluding Colon failed to show a reasonable probability he would have rejected the pleas and gone to trial (Hill/Strickland prejudice standard).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Cardwell provided ineffective assistance by failing to adequately explain the plea offer	Colon: had been led to believe plea would yield ~18 years (14 to serve) and would not accept if he understood the mandatory 25‑year floor	State: plea canvasses and record show Colon understood the 25–30 year agreement and faced far greater exposure at trial	Denied — Colon failed to show reasonable probability he would have rejected the plea and gone to trial
Whether Cardwell was ineffective for failing to prepare/attend the cooperation meeting with police	Colon: lack of counsel oversight deprived him of opportunity to negotiate a better sentence through cooperation	State: cooperation did not yield valuable information; strong state case and plea risks made cooperation unlikely to alter outcome	Denied — no prejudice shown from counsel’s role in cooperation
Whether the habeas court abused discretion by denying certification to appeal	Colon: issues are debatable and warrant appellate review	State: petitioner’s claims lack merit under Hill/Strickland and the record (strong evidence, plea canvass) forecloses relief	Denied — court did not abuse its discretion; appeal dismissed

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance standard: performance and prejudice)
Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (prejudice inquiry for guilty‑plea challenges: probability petitioner would have gone to trial)
Simms v. Warden, 229 Conn. 178 (standard for appellate review after denial of certification to appeal in habeas cases)
State v. Salamon, 287 Conn. 509 (analysis of kidnapping convictions where acts are incidental)