Francis v. Comm'r of Corr., 182 Conn. App. 647

In 1993 Kermit Francis was tried and convicted of murder and related firearms offenses; he received a 60‑year effective sentence. State v. Francis was later partly reversed as to one firearm conviction but affirmed on others.
Francis initially filed a pro se habeas petition (2001) alleging ineffective assistance by trial counsel William Collins; counsel later withdrew that petition and a second habeas followed, which restored the original petition.
At the restored habeas, Francis (represented by Michael Day) argued Collins was ineffective for not calling Fredrica Knight, an eyewitness who might have exculpated him; the habeas court denied relief and that decision was affirmed on appeal.
Francis then filed a habeas on a habeas (amended 2016) claiming Day provided ineffective assistance at the second habeas trial by (1) failing to question Knight properly and (2) failing to introduce evidence that Knight was available to testify at the criminal trial.
After a third habeas trial the court denied the amended petition, finding Knight’s testimony not credible and that, given the rest of the evidence (consistent witness statements, contemporaneous statements, and flight to New York under an alias), Knight’s testimony would not have undermined confidence in the verdict.

Issue	Francis' Argument	Commissioner/State's Argument	Held
Whether habeas counsel Day performed deficiently by failing to question Knight properly at the second habeas trial	Day’s questioning left Knight’s exculpatory account underdeveloped, undermining Francis’s ability to show trial counsel was ineffective	Any alleged questioning flaws did not matter because Knight’s testimony was inconsistent and not credible; thus no prejudice	Denied — even if performance were deficient, Francis failed to show prejudice because Knight’s testimony would not have changed the verdict
Whether Day was ineffective for not adducing evidence that Knight was available to testify at the criminal trial	Demonstrating Knight’s availability would have supported the claim that trial counsel unreasonably failed to call her	Availability evidence would not make Knight’s testimony credible or alter the outcome given other strong inculpatory evidence	Denied — absence of availability proof caused no prejudice; Knight’s testimony lacked credibility and would not undermine confidence in verdict

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
Lozada v. Warden, 223 Conn. 834 (approving habeas on a habeas to challenge effectiveness of habeas counsel)
State v. Francis, 246 Conn. 339 (direct appeal summarizing facts and upholding most convictions)
Breton v. Commissioner of Correction, 325 Conn. 640 (deference to habeas court credibility findings)
Sanchez v. Commissioner of Correction, 314 Conn. 585 (same — trier of fact’s credibility determinations)