Gould v. Commissioner of Correction, 159 Conn.App. 860

In 1993 Gould and codefendant Ronald Taylor were convicted of felony murder, robbery, attempt and conspiracy based primarily on testimony of Doreen Stiles; Gould received an 80-year sentence.
Stiles testified at trial (from a hospital) that she saw Gould and Taylor enter La Casa Green, heard an argument and a gunshot, and saw them leave; her testimony was pivotal and there was no physical evidence linking Gould to the crime.
Years later Stiles recanted to investigator Gerry O’Donnell, claiming she had lied at trial after being coerced by police; based on that recantation Gould successfully obtained habeas relief from Judge Fuger.
The Connecticut Supreme Court reversed and remanded, holding the habeas court applied the wrong actual-innocence test and allowing Gould to amend his petition to assert a due process claim based on use of perjured testimony.
On remand a second habeas trial was held; the court (Sferrazza, J.) found Stiles did not commit perjury at trial, concluded her recantation (extracted by O’Donnell) lacked credibility, and denied Gould’s petition.
Gould appealed, arguing the habeas court’s factual finding that Stiles did not perjure herself was clearly erroneous; the appellate court affirmed, deferring to the trial court’s credibility determinations.

Issue	Gould's Argument	Commissioner’s Argument	Held
Whether Stiles committed perjury at the criminal trial	Stiles’ later recantation and first habeas testimony show her trial testimony was false	Stiles’ trial testimony was credible; recantation was tainted by O’Donnell and later disavowed	Habeas court’s finding that Stiles did not perjure herself was not clearly erroneous; affirmed
Whether recantation alone requires overturning conviction / proves actual innocence	Recantation undermines state’s case and demonstrates Gould’s innocence	Recantation does not by itself meet burden to prove actual innocence; court must weigh all evidence	Court followed Miller standard: recantation insufficient alone; Gould failed to prove actual innocence
Whether the use of allegedly perjured testimony violated due process	Perjured testimony by the state deprived Gould of a fair trial	No perjury proved; thus no due process violation	Court need not reach legal test because factual finding of no perjury disposes claim
Proper standard of review for credibility findings implicating constitutional claims	Appellate court should apply scrupulous or de novo review when constitutional rights at stake	Defer to habeas court’s credibility determinations but review for clear error with scrupulous record review	Appellate court applied deferential clear-error review while scrutinizing record and affirmed

Miller v. Commissioner of Correction, 242 Conn. 745 (1997) (defines test for proving actual innocence in postconviction proceedings)
Walker v. Commissioner of Correction, 103 Conn. App. 485 (2007) (courts must weigh all evidence, including recantation, when assessing perjury claims)
Ortega v. Duncan, 333 F.3d 102 (2d Cir. 2003) (federal precedent on evaluating recantations and perjury claims)
Rhode v. Milla, 287 Conn. 731 (2008) (permitting adverse inferences from nonparty invocation of Fifth Amendment in civil proceedings)
Gaines v. Commissioner of Correction, 306 Conn. 664 (2012) (habeas court’s credibility findings accorded broad deference)
State v. Gould, 241 Conn. 1 (1997) (direct appeal describing trial evidence and convictions)