Salters v. Commissioner of Correction
2013 WL 646230
Conn. App. Ct.2013Background
- Salters appeals after habeas court denied his second amended petition for writ of habeas corpus.
- Petitioner was charged in 1996 with two counts of first-degree assault and conspiracy; trial defense counsel claimed to be an 'in-house' counsel for the Island Brothers.
- Defense filed an untimely alibi notice; trial court granted the state's motion to exclude alibi evidence related to third-party witnesses but allowed Salters to testify.
- Salters was convicted and sentenced to forty years with suspended execution after twenty-four years and probation.
- Salters filed a 2009 habeas petition alleging ineffective assistance of counsel and a Brady claim self-disclosed at issue; the habeas court rejected these claims.
- The appellate issues focus on whether trial counsel's investigation and alibi handling were reasonable and whether the Brady/material-disclosure claim was properly defaulted.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance of counsel standard and impact | Salters claims counsel's investigation and alibi handling were inadequate | Court found defense counsel's actions reasonable and credible | No error; trial counsel acted reasonably and did not prejudice Salters |
| Procedural default of Brady claim | Turner evidence withheld violated Brady | Claim procedurally defaulted; no good cause shown | Procedurally defaulted; merits not reached |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (ineffective assistance requires deficient performance and prejudice)
- Michael T. v. Commissioner of Correction, 307 Conn. 84 (Conn. 2012) (reasonable probability of different outcome if counsel had performed adequately)
- State v. Salters, 89 Conn. App. 221 (Conn. App. 2005) (review of alibi issue on direct appeal)
- Jackson v. Commissioner of Correction, 227 Conn. 124 (Conn. 1993) (procedural default principles in habeas context)
- Johnson v. Commissioner of Correction, 218 Conn. 403 (Conn. 1991) (cause and prejudice standard for default)
- Tart v. Commissioner of Correction, 94 Conn. App. 134 (Conn. App. 2006) (causation in procedural default analysis)
- Anderson v. Commissioner of Correction, 114 Conn. App. 778 (Conn. App. 2009) (cause and prejudice test for defaulted habeas claims)
- Council v. Commissioner of Correction, 286 Conn. 477 (Conn. 2008) (cause and prejudice standard; procedural default)
- Guadalupe v. Commissioner of Correction, 68 Conn. App. 376 (Conn. App. 2002) (conjunctive requirement of cause and prejudice)
- Wainwright v. Sykes, 433 U.S. 72 (U.S. 1977) (fundamental Brady framework; cause and prejudice)
- Turner (Turner reference), Turner records discussed; no official reporter cited (—) (discussion of record availability and disclosure)
- Sm all v. Commissioner of Correction, 286 Conn. 707 (Conn. 2008) (credibility determinations in habeas)
- Brown v. Commissioner of Correction, 131 Conn. App. 497 (Conn. App. 2011) (mixed question of law and fact on credibility)