Salmon v. Commissioner of Correction, 177 A.3d 566

Marvin Salmon was convicted of murder (trial in 2000) after rejecting two plea offers in 1998 (25 years for murder; 30 years effective for manslaughter+weapon). He later filed a habeas petition asserting ineffective assistance of pretrial counsel Donald Cardwell.
Key factual dispute: a second eyewitness, Duane Holmes, had given a statement and identified Salmon in 1996 but was not mentioned in Cardwell’s April and November 1998 letters to Salmon; Cardwell is deceased. Another eyewitness, Theodore Owens, had earlier identified Salmon and was referenced by defense as the only eyewitness.
At the habeas trial, Salmon testified Cardwell never told him about Holmes during plea negotiations; Cardwell’s partner (Nicholas) and the prosecutor (Fahey) gave general-practice testimony but could not attest to what Donald Cardwell told Salmon in 1998. An expert testified the November 22, 1998 letter omitted an important piece of evidence.
The habeas court concluded Salmon was “properly advised” (implicitly finding no deficient performance) and denied the habeas petition and certification to appeal. Salmon appealed that denial of certification.
The appellate court held the habeas court’s factual finding that Cardwell must have told Salmon about Holmes was clearly erroneous (no evidence supported it) and that credibility questions require remand for a new habeas trial on deficient performance; prejudice was not addressed and remains unresolved.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether denial of certification to appeal was an abuse of discretion	Salmon: issues are debatable and warrant appellate review because the habeas court made a clearly erroneous factual finding	Commissioner: habeas court properly denied certification because claim lacked merit	Court: abuse of discretion — resolution was debatable; certification denial reversed
Whether pretrial counsel performed deficiently by failing to disclose Holmes during plea negotiations	Salmon: Cardwell failed to inform him of Holmes (a second eyewitness), so performance was deficient	State/habeas court: Cardwell must have amplified his written letters and adequately advised Salmon (no deficiency)	Court: habeas court’s finding that Cardwell told Salmon was clearly erroneous; remand for new trial on performance (credibility to be resolved by factfinder)
Whether Salmon proved prejudice from alleged deficient performance (would have accepted plea)	Salmon: but for deficient advice, reasonably probable he would have accepted one of the plea offers	State: habeas court implicitly rejected performance, so prejudice need not be reached	Court: prejudice unaddressed by habeas court; appellate court cannot resolve it—remand needed for full factual findings on prejudice

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two‑prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (applies Strickland to plea‑bargaining stage)
Missouri v. Frye, 566 U.S. 134 (prejudice standard for lost or lapsed plea offers)
Lafler v. Cooper, 566 U.S. 156 (remedies and standards when counsel’s advice during plea bargaining is deficient)
Simms v. Warden, 229 Conn. 178 (standards for appellate review after denial of certification to appeal in habeas cases)
Ebron v. Commissioner of Correction, 307 Conn. 342 (Connecticut standard for showing prejudice in lapsed plea cases)