Gooden v. Commissioner of Correction, AC38169

Eric Gooden pleaded guilty in Tolland (TTD-CR-08-0091161-T) to first‑degree burglary and conspiracy on Nov. 21, 2008 under a plea calling for 10 years incarceration + 5 years special parole; counsel raised a pretrial jail‑credit issue during plea colloquy.
Gooden had earlier been arrested and held on unrelated Manchester charges (H12M-CR-07-0210233-T) beginning April 4, 2007; he claimed 286 days from that earlier custody should be credited to his controlling sentence.
On Dec. 8, 2008 Gooden entered Alford pleas in Manchester to related charges; sentencing court (Sullivan, J.) imposed an effective 10 years + 5 years special parole, and expressly refused to alter that term to account for additional jail credit from the earlier docket.
Gooden later brought a habeas petition alleging ineffective assistance of counsel (Cunningham) for failing to secure/join the April 4, 2007 jail credit and that his pleas were involuntary.
At the habeas trial, the court found the controlling sentence was the Tolland 10‑year term, that Gooden received 332 days of credit from Jan. 15, 2008 to Dec. 12, 2008, and that Cunningham did not perform deficiently because Judge Sullivan had unequivocally refused to award additional credit.
The habeas court denied relief, found no prejudice under Strickland, rejected involuntariness, granted certification to appeal, and the Appellate Court affirmed.

Issue	Gooden's Argument	Commissioner/State's Argument	Held
Ineffective assistance for failing to obtain 286 days additional presentence credit	Cunningham failed to request/join credit back to Apr. 4, 2007; that omission induced plea and prejudiced outcome	Judge Sullivan explicitly refused to award that credit; counsel raised the issue at plea; no reasonable probability sentence would differ	Held for Commissioner: no deficient performance or prejudice — judge had plainly declined to adjust the agreed 10 years + 5 years parole
Whether sentencing court could craft a shorter sentence implicitly to account for non‑statutory jail credit	Gooden: sentencing discretion could have produced a de facto shorter sentence (e.g., 9 years + X days) to reflect extra credit	State: judge declared he would not modify agreed sentence; statutory credit determination is for DOC/statute	Court did not decide the broader ultra vires question here; ruled unnecessary because judge had rejected any adjustment in this case

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance two‑prong standard)
Horn v. Commissioner of Correction, 321 Conn. 767 (standard of review and Strickland application in Connecticut)
Weathers v. Commissioner of Correction, 133 Conn. App. 440 (mere possibility of a more lenient sentence is insufficient to show Strickland prejudice)
Tyson v. Commissioner of Correction, 261 Conn. 806 (controlling sentence is longest term)
Washington v. Commissioner of Correction, 287 Conn. 792 (sentence control and related principles)
Lewis v. Commissioner of Correction, 165 Conn. App. 441 (petitioner must prevail on both Strickland prongs)