141 Conn. App. 685
Conn. App. Ct.2013Background
- Defendant Sandra Lanasa appeals after a jury trial convicting her of illegal sexual contact with a child and risk of injury to a child; the victim was a fifteen-year-old classmate of the defendant’s daughter.
- Trial occurred in 2011; the jury acquitted on sexual assault but convicted on the two remaining counts.
- Defendant challenges (1) the trial court’s continuance granted to allow the victim’s presence for closing arguments, and (2) jury instructions regarding credibility of a minor witness and access to a computer-delivered exhibit.
- The court’s continuance decision balanced victim rights with the defendant’s right to a fair trial and was not shown to cause actual prejudice.
- On appeal, the defendant also argues for a tailored credibility instruction and a specific instruction about viewing the computer exhibit; the court affirmed on those points.
- Procedural note: the form of the appeal and late waiver-of-fees motion were addressed, with the court treating the appeal on the merits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Continuance for victim’s presence | Lanasa argues prosecutorial impropriety and trial disruption. | Lanasa contends the continuance violates her rights and victim’s rights precedence. | Court did not abuse discretion; no actual prejudice shown. |
| Credibility instruction for minor witness | State argues no special instruction required; defense sought age-based credibility instruction. | Lanasa requests instruction highlighting youth as affecting credibility. | No special credibility instruction required; not reasonably probable jury misled. |
| Access to computer-delivered exhibit | Defense purportedly should have been allowed to have computer access for jury review. | Lanasa argues court failed to adequately inform and facilitate viewing the disk via computer. | Court did not abuse discretion; sufficient guidance and no likelihood of misleading the jury. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Patterson, 276 Conn. 452 (2005) (crebility instruction for complaining witnesses when applicable)
- State v. Flores, 301 Conn. 77 (2011) (court may tailor or omit evidence-related comments in charge)
- State v. Devalda, 306 Conn. 494 (2012) (standard for reviewing jury instructions)
- Irving v. Firehouse Associates, LLC, 82 Conn. App. 715 (2004) (continuance requires balancing case flow and prejudice; abuse of discretion standard)