150 Conn.App. 182
Conn. App. Ct.2014Background
- Petitioner Scott Shefelbine pleaded guilty (Oct. 20, 2008) to multiple sexual offenses and related counts arising from conduct with underage girls; he received an effective 35-year sentence, suspended after 20 years, plus probation.
- Petitioner later filed a two-count habeas petition (amended to add prosecutorial impropriety), alleging: ineffective assistance of pretrial counsel, an insufficient plea canvass (judge), and prosecutorial misconduct concerning the terms of the plea agreement (particularly promises about prosecution of his mother).
- Key factual dispute: plea negotiations included an agreement that the state would not prosecute the petitioner’s mother as an accessory or conspirator for the sexual offenses, but perjury charges/warrant relating to her testimony existed and she later pleaded guilty to one count of perjury.
- Habeas evidentiary hearing: testimony from petitioner, his father, defense counsel, the prosecutor, and competing expert witnesses on counsel effectiveness; habeas court credited defense counsel’s testimony and found petitioner not credible on key points.
- Habeas court denied relief on all claims (rejecting claims of ineffective assistance, insufficient canvass, and prosecutorial impropriety) and respondent’s procedural default defense; this appeal followed and the appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Shefelbine) | Defendant's Argument (Commissioner) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance — failure to explain offense elements | Counsel did not adequately explain differences among offenses (sexual intercourse vs. contact; age distinctions), so plea not knowing | Counsel thoroughly explained elements on multiple occasions; trial court transcript and counsel testimony show understanding | Court held counsel’s performance was not deficient; petitioner failed Strickland test |
| Plea term misrepresentation re: mother | Counsel/prosecutor led petitioner to believe his mother would not be charged for any crimes arising from the case (including perjury) | State agreed only not to prosecute mother as accessory/conspirator to sexual assaults; perjury charges were separate and were known to defense counsel | Court held petitioner was informed about perjury exposure; no misrepresentation as to the limits of the agreement |
| Conflict of interest based on flat fee retainer | Flat $300,000 retainer created incentive to avoid trial (financial disincentive), producing an actual conflict and presumed prejudice | Fee covered full representation; record shows counsel zealously represented petitioner; no evidence fee impaired performance | Court held no actual conflict existed; counsel’s performance was not adversely affected |
| Sufficiency of canvass & prosecutorial impropriety | Judge failed to ensure petitioner fully understood plea given his confusion; prosecutor had duty to clarify and disclose mother’s arrest warrant | Colloquies and counsel’s explanations satisfied canvass; prosecutor stated limits of deal on record and had informed defense of warrant | Court held plea was knowing and voluntary; no prosecutorial impropriety occurred |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-part test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Copas v. Commissioner of Correction, 234 Conn. 139 (1995) (plea bargaining as critical stage; standard for vacating guilty pleas on ineffective assistance grounds)
- Almedina v. Commissioner of Correction, 109 Conn. App. 1 (2008) (requirements for valid plea canvass and review standard)
- Anderson v. Commissioner of Correction, 127 Conn. App. 538 (2011) (standards for proving actual conflict of interest in habeas context)