Hall v. Commissioner of Correction, 152 Conn.App. 601

On June 11, 2007, a robbery occurred at a Best Way convenience store; eyewitnesses who knew Hall identified him at the scene, and a surveillance recording was introduced at trial after being copied from the store system to VHS.
Police arrested Ron Hall after witnesses chased and cornered the fleeing suspect; officers recovered ammunition and a black scarf from Hall’s car; the handgun and stolen cash were not recovered.
Hall was convicted of first‑degree robbery and second‑degree larceny and sentenced to a total effective term of 15 years, suspended after 10, with five years probation. His direct appeal affirmed the convictions and treated objections to the copied videotape and certain cross‑examination matters as unpreserved. (State v. Hall, 120 Conn. App. 191.)
Hall filed a habeas petition alleging trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to (1) admission of the copied videotape and (2) cross‑examination about prior misdemeanor convictions. The habeas court found counsel’s performance deficient on both grounds but concluded Hall suffered no prejudice; it granted relief only on an unrelated sentencing‑review issue and denied certification to appeal the habeas denial.
Hall appealed the denial of certification and the habeas denial. The appellate court reviewed whether the habeas court abused its discretion in denying certification and whether the unpreserved evidentiary claim regarding prior misdemeanors was reviewable.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether habeas court abused discretion by denying certification to appeal ineffective‑assistance claim about copied videotape	Hall: counsel was ineffective for failing to object to admission of a copied VHS that degraded image quality; this prejudiced the defense	Commissioner: habeas court correctly found no prejudice because the tape was cumulative of eyewitness ID evidence	Denied: court held failure to object was not prejudicial; videotape was cumulative and jury had strong eyewitness ID evidence
Whether prosecutorial impropriety from cross‑examination on prior misdemeanors warrants habeas relief / review	Hall: prosecutor’s questioning about old misdemeanors fatally tainted trial fairness; counsel’s failure to object rendered assistance ineffective	Commissioner: claim is unpreserved and procedurally defaulted; not reviewable on habeas	Not reviewed: Hall conceded the claim is evidentiary and it was unpreserved; court declined Golding review and dismissed the claim

Simms v. Warden, 230 Conn. 608 (CT 1994) (standards for abuse of discretion in denial of certification to appeal)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two‑prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
Michael T. v. Commissioner of Correction, 307 Conn. 84 (CT 2012) (prejudice standard under Strickland requires undermining confidence in verdict)
State v. Hall, 120 Conn. App. 191 (Conn. App. 2010) (direct appeal summarizing eyewitness identifications and evidentiary rulings)
State v. Golding, 213 Conn. 233 (CT 1989) (framework for appellate review of unpreserved claims)
Wainwright v. Sykes, 433 U.S. 72 (U.S. 1977) (cause and prejudice procedural default doctrine)
State v. Fauci, 282 Conn. 23 (CT 2007) (preserved/prosecutorial impropriety review principles)