153 Conn.App. 556
Conn. App. Ct.2014Background
- Petitioner Michael G. was convicted of multiple counts of first-degree sexual assault and risk of injury to a child involving his daughter.
- He filed an amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus after a direct appeal and a prior habeas action.
- Habeas court denied relief, finding trial counsel’s decision not to call the petitioner’s mother as a witness was reasonable and credible.
- The court credited trial counsel’s testimony and concluded the mother’s credibility was lacking.
- The habeas court denied certification to appeal; the appellate court dismissed the petition for certification to appeal.
- The issues concern whether the habeas court abused its discretion in denying certification and whether trial counsel’s performance was deficient.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the habeas court abused its discretion denying certification to appeal | Michael G. claims abuse of discretion | State argues no abuse; issues are frivolous | No abuse; certification denied |
| Whether trial counsel’s decision not to call the mother as a witness was deficient | Mother would testify to recantation aiding defense | Decision was reasonable to avoid damaging testimony | Defense counsel’s decision not deficient |
| Whether the mother’s credibility was properly considered without bias | Bias appeared in bench ruling against mother | No plain error; claim unpreserved | Claim unpreserved; no plain error review |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (establishes the two-prong standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Crocker v. Commissioner of Correction, 126 Conn. App. 110 (Conn. App. 2011) (standard for ineffective assistance)
- Davis v. Commissioner of Correction, 140 Conn. App. 597 (Conn. App. 2013) (credibility and weight of witness testimony)
- Spyke v. Commissioner of Correction, 145 Conn. App. 419 (Conn. App. 2013) (abuse-of-discretion review for certification to appeal)
- Tutson v. Commissioner of Correction, 144 Conn. App. 203 (Conn. App. 2013) (clarifies prejudice inquiry in habeas context)
- State v. James R., 138 Conn. App. 181 (Conn. App. 2012) (plain-error consideration for unpreserved bias claims)
- Burns v. Quinnipiac University, 120 Conn. App. 311 (Conn. App. 2010) (plain-error or bias review principles)
- Blumberg Associates Worldwide, Inc. v. Brown & Brown of Connecticut, Inc., 311 Conn. 123 (Conn. 2014) (plain-error/sua sponte review limitations)