Johnson v. Commissioner of Correction, 198 A.3d 52

Background

Petitioner Carvaughn Johnson was convicted after a second trial of murder and carrying a pistol without a permit; a first trial had resulted in a mistrial. Key eyewitness Ralph Ford testified at the first trial that he saw Johnson flee with a gun; at the second trial Ford recanted and the prosecution introduced his prior inconsistent statements from the first trial.
At issue in the habeas proceeding: whether trial counsel (Jones and Merkin) rendered ineffective assistance by (1) failing to adequately investigate and present two alibi witnesses (Johnson’s sister Joyce and friend Taylor Allen) who would place him at home and on landline calls during the shooting window, and (2) failing to present third-party culpability through William Holly, who allegedly saw Ford with a gun days before the shooting.
The habeas court credited Joyce and Allen as credible, found their testimony would have been helpful, and found Holly’s testimony relevant and likely admissible; it granted relief on both ineffective assistance claims.
The Appellate Court reversed in part: it held counsel’s choice not to present the alibi was reasonable strategy and that the petitioner failed to prove prejudice from not presenting Holly because Holly’s testimony was speculative and it was unclear whether Holly would have been forced to testify (Fifth Amendment issues).
The Connecticut Supreme Court granted certification and affirmed the Appellate Court: it held counsel did not perform deficiently in declining the alibi and third‑party evidence, and the petitioner failed to show prejudice from not calling Holly.

Issues

Issue	Johnson's Argument	Commissioner’s Argument	Held
Preservation of claim that counsel inadequately investigated alibi witnesses	Claim included failure to "properly prepare and present" alibi — which Johnson says encompassed inadequate investigation	The Appellate Court said investigation claim was unpreserved because pleadings focused on failure to present	Preserved: court finds "prepare" includes investigation; habeas record showed parties litigated investigation issue
Whether counsel performed deficiently by not presenting the alibi (Joyce, Allen)	If counsel had fully investigated and presented them, the alibi would have shown Johnson at home during shooting window and created reasonable doubt	Counsel reasonably chose to focus on Ford’s recantation because alibi was imprecise, placed Johnson very close to scene, risked inference of flight/consciousness of guilt, and witnesses were vulnerable on cross	Held for Commissioner: not deficient — reasonable strategic decision to avoid distracting jury and introducing proximity/flight issues
Whether counsel performed deficiently and caused prejudice by not calling Holly (third‑party culpability)	Holly would have tied Ford to a gun similar to murder weapon, supporting theory that Ford shot the victim; Holly would have testified and been admissible	Holly’s testimony lacked a sufficient nexus to the murder (speculative), and Holly likely could have invoked Fifth Amendment given unrelated pending gun‑related matters — petitioner cannot show Holly would have been compelled to testify or that admissible testimony would have produced a different result	Held for Commissioner: counsel’s choice reasonable (weak nexus); petitioner failed to prove prejudice because it was not "perfectly clear" Holly’s Fifth Amendment claim would be rejected

Key Cases Cited

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (performance and prejudice standard for ineffective assistance)
State v. Whelan, 200 Conn. 743 (admission of prior inconsistent testimony for substantive purposes)
State v. Johnson, 288 Conn. 236 (direct appeal affirming petitioner’s conviction — underlying facts)
State v. Baltas, 311 Conn. 786 (standard for admissibility of third‑party culpability evidence)
Michael T. v. Commissioner of Correction, 319 Conn. 623 (framework for evaluating counsel’s strategic decisions about calling witnesses)