161 Conn.App. 253
Conn. App. Ct.2015Background
- This is Oliphant’s fifth appeal after his 1995 larceny conviction and subsequent probation violations.
- The 2011 habeas petition sought to overturn the 1995 conviction, claiming ineffective assistance of habeas counsel and issues arising from McKay’s withdrawal and Anders brief.
- Prior appellate decisions affirmed the larceny conviction and probation revocation and rejected various habeas challenges, including ineffective-assistance claims about standby counsel.
- Judge Sferrazza, Santos, and others previously concluded McKay’s withdrawal was proper and that the underlying claims were barred or frivolous.
- The 2011 petition was dismissed as res judicata or for lack of nonfrivolous issues; the court denied certification to appeal.
- The current appeal challenges that dismissal and the denial of certification as abuse of discretion under § 52-470(g) and Simms v. Warden.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the denial of certification to appeal was an abuse of discretion | Oliphant argues denial was erroneous | Commissioner contends the denial followed Simms and was not an abuse | No abuse; denial affirmed |
| Whether the 2011 petition was barred by res judicata | Oliphant asserts new issues merit review | Commissioner asserts prior adjudications bar the petition | Yes, barred by res judicata |
| Whether McKay’s withdrawal and Anders brief were adequately reviewed earlier | Oliphant claims incomplete investigation of competency/records | Commissioner argues prior determinations foreclose new review | The issue was litigated and thus barred by res judicata |
| Whether petition alleges viable, nonfrivolous claims under practice rules | New claims survive review | Claims are frivolous or repetitive | Not viable; dismissed on res judicata/Rule 23-29 grounds |
Key Cases Cited
- Logan v. Commissioner of Correction, 125 Conn. App. 744 (2010) (two-step review for abuse of discretion and merits after denial of certification to appeal)
- Simms v. Warden, 229 Conn. 178 (1994) (two-pronged test for abuse of discretion and merits on habeas review (adopted in Simms))
- Simms v. Warden, 230 Conn. 608 (1994) (adopted test for abuse of discretion; governs certification decisions)
- Coleman v. Commissioner of Correction, 149 Conn. App. 719 (2014) ( Coleman on res judicata in habeas context; counsel withdrawal claims)
- Oliphant v. Commissioner of Correction, 146 Conn. App. 499 (2013) (affirming denial/rejecting ineffective-assistance claims on prior petitions)
- State v. Oliphant, 115 Conn. App. 542 (2009) (reconsideration of probation revocation and related claims)
- Bridges v. Commissioner of Correction, 97 Conn. App. 119 (2006) (res judicata/claim preclusion principles in CT)