143 Conn. App. 206
Conn. App. Ct.2013Background
- Petitioner challenged on habeas review the ineffective assistance claim against his appellate counsel for a direct-appeal joinder issue.
- Trial court joined two of three informations for trial; third remained separate.
- Convictions on murder, conspiracy, attempted murder, and related crimes followed; total sentence 71 years.
- Direct appeal briefed joinder issues; petitioner later pursued habeas petition alleging ineffective assistance.
- Habeas court denied summary judgment on joinder issue, granted respondent summary judgment on lack of prejudice; affirmed on appeal.
- Court applies Strickland analysis and Boscarino factors to assess potential prejudice on direct appeal if joinder had been properly briefed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether appellate counsel's performance was deficient regarding joinder briefing | Rogers claims deficient briefing prejudiced on direct appeal | Commissioner contends no prejudice; proper briefing would not have changed outcome | No reversible error; no reasonable probability of success on direct appeal with proper briefing. |
| Whether joinder was properly analyzed under Boscarino factors | Boscarino factors show potential prejudice due to violent conduct | Trial court thoroughly analyzed factors; no abuse of discretion | Petitioner failed to show substantial injustice or prejudice. |
| Whether the presumption in favor of joinder affects the outcome post Payne decision | Payne altered joinder presumption relevance | Trial court’s independent analysis unaffected by presumption | Payne change did not alter result; joinder properly non-prejudicial in this record. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Payne, 303 Conn. 538 (2012) (revised joinder approach; cross-admissibility and Boscarino framework)
- State v. Boscarino, 86 Conn. App. 447 (2004) (three factors for assessing joinder prejudicial risk)
- State v. Rogers, 123 Conn. App. 848 (2010) (direct-appeal joinder discussion in prior appeal)
- State v. Herring, 210 Conn. 78 (1989) (any murder not automatically brutal enough to require severance)
- State v. Hair, 68 Conn. App. 695 (2002) (discussion of joint trials and prejudice considerations)
- Gray v. Commissioner of Correction, 138 Conn. App. 171 (2012) (two-prong Strickland standard for ineffective assistance)
- Bridgeport v. White Eagle’s Society of Brotherly Help, Inc., 140 Conn. App. 663 (2013) (plenary review of habeas summary judgment on record)
- Edward B. v. Commissioner of Correction, 140 Conn. App. 253 (2013) (harm analysis on appeal for habeas review)