143 Conn. App. 216
Conn. App. Ct.2013Background
- June 20, 2009 home-invasion incident in Waterbury; defendant arrested with Tomasa LaPorte; charged with conspiracy and aiding and abetting home invasion and related offenses.
- Manson Youth Correctional Institution meeting on July 9, 2010 arranged by defense counsel D’Amato between defendant and co-defendant Tommy, with D’Amato, an intern, and an interpreter present.
- Tommy testified at trial; defense claimed intimidation by defendant and alleged improper influence by D’Amato during the Manson meeting.
- State’s cross-examination referenced the meeting and suggested D’Amato aided coercion of Tommy; defense objected to admission of such implications.
- Detective Rivera testified about Tommy’s statements and potential intimidation; defense cross-examined regarding the timing of promises made to Tommy.
- Trial court did not declare a mistrial; jury found defendant guilty; court sentenced him to fifteen years with ten years to serve and five years’ probation; defendant appealed on sixth amendment conflict-of-interest grounds.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did an actual conflict of interest adversely affect counsel’s performance? | Figueroa contends D’Amato’s role in the Manson meeting created a conflict. | State argues no adverse effect since defendant’s and counsel’s interests aligned. | Yes, an actual conflict affected performance and required reversal. |
| Is reversal and remand the appropriate remedy? | N/A | N/A | Yes, judgment reversed and case remanded for a new trial. |
Key Cases Cited
- Mickens v. Taylor, 535 U.S. 162 (2002) (conflict must adversely affect counsel’s performance for reversal)
- United States v. Levy, 25 F.3d 146 (2d Cir. 1994) (defense counsel’s personal interests can create a conflict")
- Eisemann v. Herbert, 401 F.3d 102 (2d Cir. 2005) (plaintiff need only plausibly show an alternative strategy was foreclosed by conflict)
- Lopez, 80 Conn. App. 386 (2003) (court's inquiry into conflict and its impact on trial strategy)
- State v. Parrott, 262 Conn. 276 (2003) (direct review appropriate where record adequate for conflict claim)
- State v. Lopez, 80 Conn. App. 394 (2003) (analysis of how counsel involvement affects trial strategy in conflict)
- United States v. DeCologero, 530 F.3d 36 (1st Cir. 2008) (prejudice may be shown through plausible alternative strategy foregone)
- Ellison v. United States, 798 F.2d 1102 (7th Cir. 1986) (conflict may foreclose pursuing certain defenses)
- State v. Lopez, 394-95 Conn. (N/A) (discusses role of counsel in securing recantation and strategic choices)