State v. Butler
129 Conn. App. 833
Conn. App. Ct.2011Background
- Butler petitioned for DNA testing under General Statutes § 54-102kk after his criminal trial.
- The underlying crimes were two armed robberies in Waterbury in October 2000, with the mask hair evidence at issue.
- Butler confessed to the robberies at police interrogation, later recanting at trial, while Diggs offered alternative third-party guilt evidence not admitted.
- Hair strands from a mask were found; DNA testing potential was framed as revealing Gardner’s or Kelly’s DNA.
- Butler was convicted in 2002 of five counts of robbery in the first degree and two counts of conspiracy to commit robbery; he appealed and was affirmed.
- The trial court denied the § 54-102kk petition in 2009, and Butler appealed the denial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does exculpatory DNA testing show a reasonable probability of acquittal | Butler | State | No reasonable probability; trial fair without exculpatory DNA. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Dupigney, 295 Conn. 50 (Conn. 2010) (defines reasonable probability and DNA testing framework)
- State v. Marra, 295 Conn. 74 (Conn. 2010) (emphasizes totality of evidence in DNA testing analysis)