State v. Johnson
149 Conn. App. 816
| Conn. App. Ct. | 2014Background
- On Oct. 31, 2009, the defendant allegedly shot and killed the victim at Davis Drive, Bristol, after a street altercation that began at a Sunoco station following a Halloween party.
- Eyewitness Ebony Shell identified the defendant from a photo array, saying he was the shooter and that she knew him as AJ; she later testified at trial.
- Lamboy, an eyewitness, also identified the defendant from a photo array; the defense did not object to Lamboy’s identification at trial.
- Police conducted a non-double-blind photo array for Shell without videotaping the procedure; Dauphinais administered the array and was aware the defendant was a suspect.
- The defendant was arrested about two nights after the shooting; a newspaper clipping about the murder was found on his nightstand at a hotel in Southington.
- The trial court denied suppression of Shell’s photo array identifications, and the defense challenged the Lamboy identification via Golding-based due process arguments on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Shell’s photo array identification was unnecessarily suggestive | Johnson argues Marquez requires suppression due to suggestiveness | Johnson contends despite not being double-blind, procedure was unduly suggestive | Not unduly suggestive; reliability considered under Marquez factors |
| Whether Lamboy’s photographic array identification should have been suppressed sua sponte | State argues no preserved error to review Lamboy’s ID | Johnson asserts suppression warranted due to suggestiveness | No reversible error; Lamboy’s ID not reviewed on appeal |
| Whether the trial court should grant an evidentiary hearing on eyewitness fallibility after Guilbert | State maintains Guilbert does not require remand and record is inadequate | Johnson seeks remand to hear expert testimony on identification reliability | Record inadequate for review; remand not granted on direct appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Marquez, 291 Conn. 122 (Conn. 2009) (establishes multi-factor test for suggestiveness and reliability)
- State v. Guilbert, 306 Conn. 218 (Conn. 2012) (post-trial eyewitness reliability decision affecting scope of review)
- State v. Golding, 213 Conn. 233 (Conn. 1989) (establishes standard for review of unpreserved constitutional claims)
- State v. Ledbetter, 275 Conn. 534 (Conn. 2005) (addressed admissibility versus weight in identification procedures)
- State v. Taft, 306 Conn. 749 (Conn. 2012) (evidentiary hearing considerations in post-conviction claims)