Peeler v. Commissioner of Correction
155 A.3d 772
| Conn. App. Ct. | 2017Background
- Russell Peeler was convicted in state court for the murders of Kathy Clarke and Leroy Brown Jr.; guilt convictions affirmed and penalty phase eventually resulted (after remand) in a death sentence later vacated and converted to life; habeas petition filed challenging multiple aspects of the criminal proceedings.
- While free on bond in related matters, Peeler had previously shot Rudolph Snead and later Snead was killed; ballistics and witness identifications connected Peeler to both incidents and fueled the murder prosecution.
- During investigation, Josephine Lee (resident at 200 Earl Ave.) cooperated with authorities, recorded conversations for the FBI, and later testified for the state; other cooperating witnesses (Keene, Ryan) testified under plea/cooperation agreements.
- In his amended habeas petition, Peeler alleged: (1) the habeas court wrongly denied his request to proceed pro se; (2) his expedited trial schedule deprived him of rights and that claim was not procedurally defaulted; (3) appellate counsel was ineffective for not challenging denial of a change of venue based on pretrial publicity; and (4) Brady violations for nondisclosure of: Lee’s FBI recordings, a CI recording, and phone records from 200 Earl Ave.
- The habeas court denied relief on all claims; this appeal affirms, holding Peeler waived self-representation, did not preserve the trial-schedule argument below, appellate counsel’s choices were reasonable, and the nondisclosed materials were not Brady-material.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Peeler) | Defendant's Argument (Commissioner) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Denial of right to proceed pro se in habeas | Peeler argued court improperly denied his motion to represent himself (structural error) | Commissioner: habeas self-rep right is nonconstitutional/common-law; denial reviewed for abuse of discretion; waiver occurred | Court: Peeler explicitly waived self-representation at April 10, 2014 hearing; no reversal |
| 2. Procedural default of expedited trial-schedule claim | Peeler: claim was premature on direct appeal and so not defaulted | Commissioner: habeas reply alleged procedural default; Peeler framed issue below only as ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, not prematurity | Court: decline to consider new prematurity argument on appeal; claim procedurally defaulted |
| 3. Ineffective assistance of appellate counsel (failure to appeal denial of change of venue for pretrial publicity) | Peeler: appellate counsel should have raised inherent-prejudice venue claim | Commissioner: counsel reasonably prioritized stronger issues; voir dire and unused peremptories undermined prejudice showing | Court: Strickland not satisfied — appellate counsel conducted reasonable review and made tactical choice; no deficient performance |
| 4. Brady claim for nondisclosure of Lee recordings, CI recording, and phone records | Peeler: these recordings/records were favorable and material and should have been disclosed | Commissioner: evidence either inculpatory, cumulative, not in state possession, or immaterial | Court: none of the items met Brady's suppression/favorable/material prongs; Lee and CI recordings immaterial/cumulative; unpreserved local-to-local phone records not in state control and subpoenaed records would not have shown exculpatory call |
Key Cases Cited
- Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) (prosecution must disclose materially favorable evidence)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419 (1995) (materiality standard for suppressed evidence: reasonable probability of a different result)
- Skilling v. United States, 561 U.S. 358 (2010) (inherent-prejudice standard for pretrial publicity is for extreme cases)
- Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975) (constitutional right to self-representation in criminal prosecutions)
- State v. Braswell, 318 Conn. 815 (2015) (canvas and standards for invocation/waiver of self-representation)
- State v. Reynolds, 264 Conn. 1 (2003) (pretrial publicity and the heavy burden to prove inherent prejudice)