133 Conn. App. 614
Conn. App. Ct.2012Background
- Defendant was convicted of assaulting a peace officer in violation of § 53a-167c and two counts of interfering with an officer under § 53a-167a.
- On remand from the Connecticut Supreme Court, Baptiste argued the trial court failed to instruct the jury to consider the reasonableness of police force in determining if officers acted in the performance of their duties, violating due process to present a defense and prove all elements.
- Factual history: detectives surveilled a drug location in Norwich, encountered Baptiste during a search, and a struggle ensued with multiple officers; Baptiste bit one officer and resisted arrest.
- Baptiste testified that unknown men in plain clothes assaulted him; he claimed the officers did not identify themselves as police and that excessive force was used.
- The trial court gave a basic definition of "in the performance of his duties" but did not instruct on reasonable force; on appeal, the court found this deficient and a due process violation requiring a new trial.
- The appellate court reversed, holding that reasonable-force instruction was necessary and that the error was not harmless, necessitating remand for new trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether failure to instruct on reasonable force violated due process | Baptiste argues the jury needed to consider reasonable force to determine performance of duties | State contends the instruction was adequate under Davis and Turner | Yes, prejudicial error; remand for new trial |
| Whether the court should have given 53a-22/53a-23 resist-excessive-force guidance | Baptiste contends missing resistance-to-excessive-force guidance impaired defense | State maintains sufficiency of other instructions | Yes, instruction required; failure not harmless |
| Golding preservation and review of unpreserved claims | Baptiste asserts Golding review applies due to constitutional magnitude | State argues unpreserved claim should not be reviewed | Golding review warranted; new trial ordered |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Davis, 261 Conn. 553 (Conn. 2002) (detailed instruction required on officer's performance of duty; self-defense not always necessary)
- State v. Turner, 91 Conn.App. 17 (Conn. App. 2005) (reasonable force inherent in performance of duties; excessive force may remove officer from duties)
- State v. Salters, 78 Conn. App. 1 (Conn. App. 2003) (excessive force may place actions outside duties)
- State v. Jay, 124 Conn.App. 294 (Conn. App. 2010) (instruction sufficiency when degree of force reasonable)
- State v. Williamson, 206 Conn. 685 (Conn. 1988) (jury must be instructed on essential elements of crime)