159 Conn.App. 526
Conn. App. Ct.2015Background
- Defendant Edwin Leon, Jr. shot and killed his girlfriend after an evening of drinking and arguing; he had no permit for the revolver.
- Defendant testified the shooting was accidental: he held the gun to the victim’s neck, it discharged, and he did not intentionally pull the trigger.
- Charged with murder and carrying a revolver without a permit; acquitted of murder but convicted of first‑degree manslaughter with a firearm (§ 53a-55(a)(3)) and carrying a revolver without a permit (§ 29-35).
- Defense counsel, during closing, urged the jury the shooting was unintentional and expressly suggested conviction only on lesser included offenses (criminally negligent homicide and manslaughter).
- On appeal defendant claimed counsel’s on-the-record concession of guilt to lesser offenses (without the defendant’s on-the-record consent) violated his rights to plead not guilty, to testify, to have the State prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and to effective assistance of counsel.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel’s concession to guilt for lesser offenses on closing, without an on‑record defendant consent, violated defendant’s rights and amounted to ineffective assistance | State: record is inadequate for direct review of ineffective assistance; claim belongs in habeas corpus | Leon: counsel’s concession functionally waived basic trial rights and must appear on the record; reviewable on direct appeal | Court: claim predicated on ineffective assistance; record inadequate for direct review — require habeas proceeding; appeal fails under Golding first prong |
| Whether the record is adequate to review the unpreserved constitutional claim on direct appeal | State: transcripts don’t show counsel’s reasons; further evidentiary development required | Leon: transcripts show counsel’s concession and conflict of interest; no hearing needed | Court: record is incomplete; cannot discern strategic reasons; review would be speculative — record inadequate |
| Whether the claim qualifies for review under Golding or plain error doctrines | Leon: claim meets Golding/prima facie constitutional magnitude; alternatively plain error | State: Golding/prongs unmet; plain error also fails where record is inadequate | Court: Golding prong one (adequate record) fails; plain error likewise unavailable when record is inadequate |
| Whether supervisory powers require reversal despite inadequate record | Leon: supervisory relief appropriate because basic rights were effectively waived without on-the-record consent | State: supervisory power not warranted absent legal principle failure or inadequate traditional protections | Court: supervisory powers not appropriate; traditional remedies (habeas) suffice; no reversal warranted |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Greene, 274 Conn. 134, 874 A.2d 750 (2005) (ineffective assistance claims normally require habeas record; direct review rare and limited)
- State v. Crespo, 246 Conn. 665, 718 A.2d 925 (1998) (direct appeals addressing counsel effectiveness limited to court errors, not counsel actions)
- State v. Golding, 213 Conn. 233, 567 A.2d 823 (1989) (criteria for appellate review of unpreserved constitutional claims)
- In re Yasiel R., 317 Conn. 773 (2015) (modification/application of Golding framework)
- State v. Jose V., 157 Conn. App. 393 (2015) (declined direct review of counsel effectiveness where record silent on strategic reasons)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648 (1984) (circumstances where prejudice presumed and Sixth Amendment violated)
- United States v. Holman, 314 F.3d 837 (7th Cir. 2002) (discussion of on-the-record defendant consent as preferred practice)