State v. Covington, 184 Conn. App. 332

Background

On March 24, 2014 two brothers (Taijhon and Trayvon Washington) were shot from a car; Taijhon died and Trayvon survived with a bullet lodged in his head.
Defendant Jeffrey Covington was charged with murder, first‑degree assault (both tried to a jury), carrying a pistol without a permit (jury), and criminal possession of a firearm (bench trial after waiving jury).
The jury convicted Covington of carrying a pistol without a permit, but was hopelessly deadlocked on the murder and assault counts and a mistrial was declared as to those counts.
At a subsequent court (bench) trial the judge found Covington guilty of criminal possession of a firearm; the judge relied on circumstantial evidence including post‑shooting admissions, a witness who saw a handgun passed to Covington after the shooting, and ballistic evidence consistent with a .32 handgun.
Sentences were imposed consecutively; Covington appealed arguing (1) insufficiency of evidence on the carrying without a permit conviction, (2) that the bench finding on possession violated his jury‑trial/fair‑trial rights because it allegedly contradicted the jury’s outcome on murder/assault, and (3) sentencing error for relying on facts that contradicted the jury’s supposed verdict.

Issues

Issue	State's Argument	Covington's Argument	Held
1. Sufficiency of evidence to convict for carrying a pistol without a permit	Circumstantial evidence (admissions, witness saw handgun passed to defendant, bullets consistent with a handgun) permitted a reasonable jury to find defendant carried a pistol with a <12" barrel outside his dwelling and lacked a permit	Evidence was insufficient because no gun was introduced, no eyewitness identified him as shooter, no forensic match; relies on purported jury acquittal on murder/assault to undermine inference he was shooter	Affirmed — evidence (including admissions, witness testimony, and ballistics consistent with a handgun) was sufficient; jury’s deadlock on other counts is not an acquittal and does not undermine the guilty verdict
2. Bench conviction for criminal possession violated jury trial/fair trial because it contradicted the jury’s verdict on murder/assault	Court could consider all evidence at bench trial; jury was deadlocked (mistrial), not acquitted, so no inconsistency	The court impermissibly contravened the jury’s (alleged) verdict on murder/assault when finding him guilty of possession, violating Sixth Amendment and fair trial rights	Denied — claim unpreserved and fails Golding/prong analysis; jury’s inability to reach a verdict is not a verdict and there was no constitutional violation or plain error
3. Sentencing error: court relied on facts contradicting jury verdict when imposing sentence	Sentencing court may consider the circumstances of the firearm’s use; jury was hung not acquitted; court did not find murder/assault convictions but considered evidence of shooting conduct relevant to appropriate sentence	Court’s reliance on judicial finding that he shot the victims contradicted jury’s (alleged) verdict and so sentence must be vacated	Denied — claim rests on incorrect premise that jury acquitted; no preserved error and no basis for Golding, plain error, or supervisory relief

Key Cases Cited

State v. Golding, 213 Conn. 233 (constitutional error bypass doctrine)
State v. Campbell, 328 Conn. 444 (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
State v. Daniels, 207 Conn. 374 (unanimity requirement for jury verdicts)
State v. Williams, 231 Conn. 235 (circumstantial proof of barrel length; handgun inference)
State v. Fleming, 111 Conn. App. 337 (inference of <12" barrel from witness holding gun in one hand)
State v. Miles, 97 Conn. App. 236 (barrel length may be proven circumstantially)
In re Yasiel R., 317 Conn. 773 (modification of Golding review framework)
State v. Otto, 305 Conn. 51 (concealment/destruction of weapon evidences consciousness of guilt)