Henderson v. Commissioner of Correction, 181 Conn. App. 778

Background

Mark Henderson pleaded guilty to first‑degree robbery as a persistent dangerous felony offender and received a 20‑year sentence; he did not file a direct appeal.
Henderson later filed a pro se amended habeas petition alleging (a) the trial judges deprived him of due process by denying self‑representation, denying counsel withdrawal, refusing an investigator, and refusing recusal; and (b) appointed counsel Drapp provided ineffective assistance (failed to pursue a necessity defense, failed to interview witnesses, conflicted, failed to advise about persistent offender consequences and appeal rights).
The habeas court conducted a bench trial; it found Henderson competent, rejected his claims that hunger strikes or hearing loss impaired his plea decision, and concluded Drapp did not coerce the plea.
The habeas court held that Henderson’s unconditional guilty plea waived pretrial, nonjurisdictional claims (including many ineffectiveness and structural/self‑representation claims), limiting habeas review to collateral attack on the voluntariness/validity of the plea itself.
The habeas court denied the amended petition and later denied Henderson’s petition for certification to appeal; this appeal challenges that denial and the waiver analysis.

Issues

Issue	Henderson’s Argument	State’s Argument	Held
Whether pretrial claims (denial of self‑representation, refusal to remove counsel, denial of investigator, recusal denial) survived an unconditional guilty plea	These rulings were structural and not waived by a guilty plea; they may be raised collaterally	An unconditional, knowing, voluntary guilty plea waives all nonjurisdictional antecedent defects, including these claims	Waived: court held these pretrial, nonjurisdictional claims were forfeited by the unconditional plea
Whether antecedent ineffective assistance claims (failure to investigate, pursue necessity defense, counsel conflict) invalidate the plea	Counsel’s preplea failures were serious and intertwined with plea decision; but for them Henderson would have refused the plea	Antecedent ineffective assistance unrelated to the plea’s validity is waived by the plea; only counsel errors that show the plea was unknowing/ involuntary survive	Denied: antecedent ineffectiveness was waived; Henderson failed to show a reasonable probability he would not have pleaded guilty
Whether counsel coerced or otherwise rendered plea involuntary (plea‑stage effectiveness and voluntariness)	Plea was the product of coercion, impaired decisionmaking (hunger strike), and lack of advice about appeal rights	Record, competency evaluations, and counsel’s testimony show plea was knowing, voluntary, and counsel did not coerce; no duty to advise about appeal absent request	Denied: plea found knowing, intelligent, voluntary; competency and medical testimony supported voluntariness
Whether habeas court abused discretion by denying certification to appeal	Certification denial prevented review of nonwaived issues and alleged failures to address claims	Denial was proper because the underlying claims were frivolous or waived by the plea; petitioner failed Simms standard	Denied: no abuse of discretion; claims were not debatable among jurists and largely waived by plea

Key Cases Cited

Tollett v. Henderson, 411 U.S. 258 (defendant who pleads guilty waives antecedent nonjurisdictional constitutional claims)
Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (ineffective‑assistance standard in plea context requires showing defendant would not have pleaded but for counsel’s errors)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two‑pronged test for ineffective assistance: performance and prejudice)
State v. Johnson, 253 Conn. 1 (unconditional guilty plea waives nonjurisdictional defects)
Dukes v. Warden, 161 Conn. 337 (ineffectiveness claims generally waived by guilty plea unless interrelated with plea’s voluntariness)
Simms v. Warden, 229 Conn. 178 (standard for appellate review when habeas court denies certification to appeal)