State v. Crawley, 138 Conn. App. 124

Crawley was convicted after a joint jury trial of offenses arising from two separate 2002 incidents; cases were consolidated for trial.
Before trial on March 9, 2004, counsel for the two cases created confusion about who represented Crawley; Freeman purportedly represented the second case, while Hyde/Bayer had represented the first.
Crawley sought to replace counsel and sought a continuance; the court denied further delay because of prior continuances and the lack of active counsel on file.
During trial, Crawley was absent for direct and cross-examination; the court proceeded with the trial in his absence after informing him the proceedings would continue.
The court declined a competency hearing as requested; Crawley was later convicted on multiple counts and enhancement under § 53a-40b for offenses while on release; appellate relief was sought and the judgments were affirmed.
The appeal raises challenges to confrontation rights, continuance for new counsel, and competency evaluation, with the state noting Golding-based review and Fagan-related limitations on the sentence-enhancement issue.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Confrontation right waived by absence	State contends Crawley validly waived presence by leaving after warning	Crawley did not knowingly waive his right to be present	Waiver inferred; no reversible error under Golding
Continuance to obtain new counsel	Court abused discretion by denying last-minute continuance	Breakdown in communication warranted new counsel	No abuse; no exceptional circumstances; delay tactic not proven
Competency evaluation during trial	Court should not order if defendant disrupts proceedings	Behavior suggested inability to assist counsel	Court properly denied; no substantial reason shown for incompetence
Competency standard and statutory framework	Law requires competency evaluation upon reasonable doubt	No substantial doubt; evaluation unnecessary	Court acted within discretion; no error in denying evaluation
Enhancement under § 53a-40b for offenses while on release	Enhancement constitutional; supports sentence	Violates right to jury trial	Fagan controls; not reconsidered on appeal

State v. Golding, 213 Conn. 233 (Conn. 1989) (constitutional errors review for unpreserved claims)
State v. Peeler, 271 Conn. 338 (Conn. 2004) (adequacy of review for constitutional claims)
State v. Patterson, 230 Conn. 385 (Conn. 1994) (intelligent, knowing waiver of rights; when explicit)
State v. Vines, 71 Conn. App. 751 (Conn. App. 2002) (waiver inferred from conduct after trial begins)
State v. Gonzalez, 205 Conn. 673 (Conn. 1987) (court may infer waiver from totality of conduct)
State v. Drakeford, 202 Conn. 75 (Conn. 1987) (warning of consequences sufficient for waiver without full colloquy)
Sekou v. Warden, 216 Conn. 678 (Conn. 1991) (breakdown in communication not automatically entitlement to new counsel)
State v. DesLaurier, 230 Conn. 572 (Conn. 1994) (trial court may rely on its own observations for competency)
State v. Kendall, 123 Conn. App. 625 (Conn. App. 2010) (standard for reviewing competency determinations)
State v. Drakeford, 202 Conn. 75 (Conn. 1987) (warning sufficiency for waiver)