164 Conn. App. 676
Conn. App. Ct.2016Background
- Petitioner Julio Morquecho was convicted of murder (after a second trial) for the April 20, 2006 killing of his former partner; conviction affirmed on direct appeal.
- State’s case was entirely circumstantial; no direct evidence placed Morquecho at the scene; first trial resulted in a hung jury.
- Morquecho maintained he was at home asleep during the critical time (approx. 1:40–2:10 a.m.); several housemates might have provided alibi testimony but their statements to police were inconsistent.
- Trial counsel Jeffrey Hutcoe declined to present an alibi defense or call certain housemates, concluding their likely testimony would be weak, inconsistent, and harmful to the defense.
- Habeas trial elicited testimony from Morquecho, his brother Carlos, and Hutcoe; the habeas court credited Hutcoe and discredited petitioner and brother on credibility.
- Habeas court denied relief and denied certification to appeal; petitioner appealed that denial, arguing ineffective assistance for failure to call alibi witnesses. The appellate court dismissed the appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial counsel was ineffective for not calling alibi witnesses | Morquecho: Hutcoe failed to call four witnesses who would have testified he was home, so counsel’s performance was deficient | State: Hutcoe reasonably investigated and made a strategic decision not to present weak, inconsistent alibi witnesses | Court held counsel’s decision was reasonable trial strategy; petitioner failed Strickland performance prong |
| Whether habeas court abused discretion in denying certification to appeal | Morquecho: Issues are debatable and deserve review | State: Issues are not debatable; habeas court reasonably denied certification | Court held denial was not an abuse of discretion and dismissed appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong ineffective assistance test: deficient performance and prejudice)
- Rosado v. Commissioner of Correction, 129 Conn. App. 368 (2011) (standard for abuse of discretion in denial of certification to appeal)
- Simms v. Warden, 230 Conn. 608 (1994) (criteria for when a habeas petitioner may obtain certification to appeal)
- Vazquez v. Commissioner of Correction, 128 Conn. App. 425 (2011) (summary of Strickland standard in Connecticut habeas context)