168 Conn. App. 505
Conn. App. Ct.2016Background
- On Sept. 6, 2009, Kevin Soler was shot and killed after meeting someone to buy drugs; the shooter fled and the victim’s companion dropped a cell phone linking to Robert Taylor, the intended robbery target.
- Police investigation led to arrests of five men, including Jayevon Blaine; a 9mm handgun recovered from under a mattress in the bedroom shared by Blaine and DeAndre Harper matched the bullet that killed Soler.
- Four alleged coconspirators (Clemons, Waddell, Palmer, Lomax) testified that they and Blaine agreed to rob Taylor that evening, with Blaine to be the gunman, Lomax to drive, Waddell as backup, and Palmer in the car.
- At trial Blaine was convicted of conspiracy to commit robbery in the first degree but acquitted of murder, felony murder, and attempted robbery.
- Blaine appealed, asserting (1) insufficient evidence for the conspiracy conviction, (2) erroneous denial of a third‑party culpability instruction implicating Harper, and (3) erroneous jury instruction on the intent required for conspiracy (Pond instruction).
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | Blaine's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for conspiracy conviction | Testimony from four coconspirators showed an agreement and overt acts to rob Taylor; evidence construed in favor of verdict supports conviction | Jury’s acquittals on shooting-related charges show jury rejected that Blaine was shooter; without being shooter, insufficient evidence of conspiracy | Affirmed — evidence of planning and agreement to commit robbery was sufficient despite acquittals (inconsistent verdicts permissible) |
| Denial of third‑party culpability instruction (Harper) | Any failure to give the instruction was harmless because coconspirator testimony independently supported Blaine’s role in the conspiracy | Evidence (weapon under Harper’s bed, phone calls) warranted an instruction that a third party may have committed the shooting | No reversible error — court properly declined instruction; if error, it was harmless because conspiracy finding unaffected |
| Failure to give Pond instruction on specific intent re: deadly weapon | Jury instructions as given were adequate; defense counsel reviewed and agreed to instructions | Court should have instructed per State v. Pond that intent must be to use/threaten a deadly weapon for first‑degree robbery conspiracy | Waived — defendant acquiesced to instructions at charging conference; claim thus barred on appeal |
| Plain error / supervisory review of waived instruction | Valid waiver prevents plain error review; no extraordinary circumstances warranting supervisory review | Waiver not knowing because Pond was later affirmed by Supreme Court | Rejected — waiver valid; Pond decision predated trial and claim forfeited |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Arroyo, 292 Conn. 558 (permits factually inconsistent verdicts; sufficiency review focuses on evidence supporting conviction)
- State v. Pond, 315 Conn. 451 (jury must find defendant specifically intended robbery to involve display/threatened use of deadly weapon for certain conspiracy convictions)
- State v. Kitchens, 299 Conn. 447 (waiver doctrine where counsel reviews and accepts jury instructions)
- State v. Delossantos, 211 Conn. 258 (limits for when third‑party culpability instruction is warranted)
- United States v. Powell, 469 U.S. 57 (Supreme Court precedent supporting permissibility of inconsistent verdicts)