State v. Heredia
139 Conn. App. 319
Conn. App. Ct.2012Background
- Death of Jose “Cucho” Pagan following a Hartford party fight and gunfire on Aug. 4–5, 2006; defendant and others believed Raul Robles killed Rodriguez; witnesses describe threatening statements by defendant; Robles later shot at Almedina’s home with Pagan’s residence nearby; multiple bullets fired from two guns, including a 0.9 mm Makarov; defendant overheard after Rodriguez’s death stating intent to take action; jury convicted defendant of intentional manslaughter with a firearm and conspiracy to commit assault, after acquittals on murder and conspiracy to commit murder; defendant challenged corpus delicti corroboration and exclusion of a defense witness; trial included testimony placing defendant in possession of a similar handgun.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Corpus delicti and corroboration of inculpatory statements | State argues independent corroboration existed; corpus delicti not violated | Heredia contends lack of independent corroboration for confessions | Not reviewable on Golding; there was corroboration; no plain error |
| Exclusion of defense witness testimony as residual hearsay | State argues exclusion was proper; not needed for defense | Kelly’s testimony admissible as residual hearsay and needed for defense | Court did not abuse discretion; no constitutional violation; evidentiary ruling affirmed |
| Golding review and preservation of evidentiary claims | Golding applies to unpreserved constitutional claims | Claims should be reviewed as constitutional | Golding not satisfied; preservation and lack of constitutional magnitude; claim rejected |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. McArthur, 96 Conn. App. 155 (Ct. App. 2006) (addresses corpus delicti and unpreserved claims; trustworthiness doctrine)
- State v. Uretek, Inc., 207 Conn. 706 () (corpus delicti not a fundamental right; review limits)
- State v. Beverly, 224 Conn. 372 (1993) (corpus delicti as rule of evidence, not fundamental right)
- State v. Oliveras, 210 Conn. 751 (1989) (pre-Golding corpus delicti discussion; influence on Golding analysis)
- State v. Davis, 298 Conn. 1 (2010) (standard for admissibility and confrontation rights in evidentiary rulings)
- State v. McClendon, 248 Conn. 572 (1999) (residual hearsay exception rarity and abuse of discretion standard)