State v. Dijmarescu, 182 Conn. App. 135

Background

Defendant Gheorghe Dijmarescu was charged with assault in the third degree and breach of the peace in the second degree for an incident on July 1, 2012, in which his wife (L) testified he grabbed her hair and slammed her head into a kitchen table. Jury convicted him of breach of the peace and acquitted him of third-degree assault.
Defendant was represented by private counsel Raymond Hassett, who moved to withdraw at a pretrial hearing asserting a breakdown in communication and inability to prepare the client; the court granted the motion and allowed time to obtain new counsel; defendant later proceeded pro se briefly and then obtained a special public defender for trial.
On the eve of trial the state disclosed it would offer testimony about an uncharged 2004 Mount Everest incident in which L alleged the defendant punched her unconscious; the defense moved to exclude as untimely and unduly prejudicial; the court denied the motion and admitted the testimony with limiting instructions.
At trial L’s testimony about the charged incident was corroborated by police, shelter personnel, and medical records; the jury heard extensive cross-examination of L and limiting jury instructions about the uncharged misconduct evidence.
Defendant argued on appeal: (1) the court violated his Sixth Amendment right by allowing Hassett to withdraw; (2) admission of uncharged misconduct was improper and prejudicial; and (3) the court should have canvassed him before he chose to testify (Fifth Amendment). The appellate court affirmed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether granting counsel's motion to withdraw violated defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel of choice	State: withdrawal did not implicate a constitutional right because counsel sought to withdraw; defendant had reasonable opportunity to obtain new counsel	Defendant: court failed to satisfy Practice Book §3-10(a) notice and good-cause requirements; Sixth Amendment implicated	Court: no Sixth Amendment violation; court did not abuse discretion in granting withdrawal—defendant had actual notice, counsel showed breakdown in communication, and no material adverse timing effect
Whether admission of uncharged misconduct (2004 Everest incident) was improper and prejudicial	State (later conceded abuse of discretion): even if admission was erroneous, error harmless given strength of evidence of charged offense	Defendant: disclosure was untimely and the evidence was irrelevant or unduly prejudicial, likely to show propensity	Court: assumed error but found it harmless—overwhelming corroborated evidence of charged offense, limiting instructions, extensive cross-examination, and minimal emphasis by prosecutor
Whether failure to canvass defendant before he testified violated his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination	State: no constitutional requirement to canvass when defendant is represented; counsel likely advised defendant	Defendant: waiver was not shown to be intelligent and voluntary absent court canvass	Court: no constitutional obligation to canvass where represented by counsel; declined to impose supervisory rule; claim rejected
Whether appellate court should exercise supervisory authority to require canvass before testifying	N/A	Defendant asked for supervisory rule to mandate canvass	Court: declined—extraordinary remedy not warranted; existing protections adequate

Key Cases Cited

Wheat v. United States, 486 U.S. 153 (1988) (Sixth Amendment right to counsel has limits; focus is effective representation rather than choice of a particular lawyer)
United States v. Hughey, 147 F.3d 423 (5th Cir. 1998) (no constitutional right to representation by a particular attorney)
State v. Peeler, 320 Conn. 567 (Conn. 2016) (discussing limits of counsel-of-choice claims)
State v. Fernandez, 254 Conn. 637 (Conn. 2000) (defendant need only be given reasonable opportunity to obtain new counsel when counsel seeks to withdraw)
State v. Gamer, 152 Conn. App. 1 (Conn. App. 2014) (trial court may rely on counsel’s representations re: breakdown in communication; review of withdrawal motions for abuse of discretion)
State v. Urbanowski, 163 Conn. App. 377 (Conn. App. 2016) (framework for admitting uncharged misconduct evidence and harmless error analysis)
State v. Woods, 297 Conn. 569 (Conn. 2010) (no constitutional obligation to canvass a represented defendant before testifying)