185 Conn. App. 806
Conn. App. Ct.2018Background
- Cleveland Brown was tried by jury on charges including murder and carrying a pistol without a permit; convicted of murder and carrying a pistol without a permit.
- The jury initially announced its verdict while the court monitor (who transcribes proceedings) was absent, so that announcement was not transcribed.
- When the monitor returned, the court had the jury foreperson reiterate the verdict on the record; the foreperson announced guilty on count 1 (murder) and count 4 (pistol), not guilty on counts 2 and 3.
- The trial judge stated on the record that the verdict was repeated and that "all of the jurors concurred in the verdict." Defense counsel later stated on the record that jurors had nodded affirmatively.
- Brown raised for the first time on appeal a constitutional claim that the court failed to ensure each juror orally announced concurrence with the verdict (and that the transcript therefore did not reflect individual oral concurrence).
- The Appellate Court held the record inadequate under State v. Golding to review an unpreserved constitutional claim and affirmed the conviction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Brown) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court failed to ensure the trial transcript reflected each juror’s oral concurrence with the verdict | The record is inadequate for review of Brown’s unpreserved claim; alternatively, no constitutional right requires each juror to orally state concurrence | Practice Book § 42-29 requires jurors to announce the verdict in open court and the court’s failure to have each juror orally concur violated due process | Record is inadequate under Golding; court declined to reach merits and affirmed conviction |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Golding, 213 Conn. 233 (establishes four‑part test for first‑raised appellate constitutional claims)
- In re Yasiel R., 317 Conn. 773 (discusses Golding standard and appellate review scope)
- State v. Benitez, 122 Conn. App. 608 (defendant must attempt to rectify or supplement record when alleging unpreserved error)
- State v. Vines, 71 Conn. App. 751 (declining review where defendant failed to create record of events underlying claim)