158 Conn.App. 431
Conn. App. Ct.2015Background
- Feb. 14, 1996, shooting occurred: Mukhtaar allegedly approached Sierra’s car and fired four shots, killing Horeglad.
- Mukhtaar was convicted of murder under Gen. Stat. § 53a-54a and sentenced to 50 years in 1997; direct appeal affirmed by Supreme Court.
- Mukhtaar pursued multiple habeas petitions (first Jan. 31, 2001; second Apr. 2, 2001; amended Dec. 21, 2006) with various claims; third petition filed Jan. 14, 2008 and amended Sept. 8, 2010.
- Third petition alleged ineffective assistance by first habeas counsel Kirschbaum for failing to investigate the state’s case, third-party culpability, and alibi defenses.
- Habeas court conducted three-day hearing; denied the third petition, granted certification to appeal, and the appellate court upheld denial, finding no ineffective assistance by Kirschbaum.
- On appeal, the core question is whether Kirschbaum’s performance in the first habeas proceeding was deficient and prejudicial under Strickland; the court analyzes each asserted deficiency.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance for failure to investigate the state’s case | Mukhtaar claims Kirschbaum failed to pursue Sierra’s statements discrepancies | Kirschbaum’s decisions were strategic and lacked prejudice | No reversible error; failure not shown to be deficient or prejudicial |
| Ineffective assistance for failing to pursue third-party culpability | McCoy should have been investigated as a possible third party | No direct connection shown; defense strategy reasonable | No prejudice; third-party evidence insufficient to undermine outcome |
| Ineffective assistance for failing to pursue an alibi defense | Alibis (New Jersey and New York) were not adequately investigated | Investigation conducted; alibi not substantiated; trial strategy reasonable | No deficient performance or prejudice; alibi unsubstantiated |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Arroyo, 284 Conn. 597 (2007) (third-party culpability must connect to the crime, not just motive or suspicion)
- Lozada v. Warden, 223 Conn. 834 (1992) (requirement to prove ineffective assistance for habeas counsel twice (Lozada doctrine))
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong test: deficient performance and prejudice)
- Holloway v. Commissioner of Correction, 145 Conn. App. 353 (2013) (definition of prejudice and reasonable probability standard)
- Lozada v. Warden, 223 Conn. 834 (1992) (necessity of proving ineffective habeas counsel to establish ineffective trial counsel)