State v. Maietta, 320 Conn. 678

Defendant John Maietta pleaded guilty (Sept. 26, 2012) to harassment and criminal trespass, received a suspended sentence and two years probation with conditions: submit to reasonable-suspicion searches, comply with a standing criminal protective order (no contact with protected person D; no firearm possession).
Defendant signed a Firearms Compliance Statement on Oct. 1, 2012, acknowledging ineligibility to possess firearms and representing he had none; state firearms database nonetheless showed firearms associated with him or his late father.
After D told a probation officer she believed Maietta had firearms and that he had taken his father’s guns when appointed conservator, probation obtained records and arranged a planned probation search of Maietta’s apartment and a rented garage, with police present for safety.
On Nov. 1, 2012, Maietta allowed probation officers into his apartment, accompanied them to the Newington garage, opened it with his key, identified a dresser and drawer, and officers found a Harrington & Richardson .22 handgun matching his father’s registration.
Maietta was charged with weapon possession and with violating probation; the trial court denied motions to dismiss and to suppress, found probation violation, continued probation with added conditions, and the defendant appealed to the Connecticut Supreme Court.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Maietta)	Held
Whether exclusionary rule bars admission of gun/statements at probation revocation	Exclusionary rule inapplicable to probation revocation; evidence admissible	Search was really law-enforcement and exclusionary rule should apply	Exclusionary rule does not apply in probation revocation here; trial court properly admitted evidence
Whether separation of powers violated by police involvement in search	Probation officers acted in judicial-branch capacity; police presence for safety only	Police converted probation officers into law-enforcement agents, usurping judicial branch	No separation-of-powers violation; cooperation between branches permissible and record shows probation officers led the search
Sufficiency of evidence to find probation violation	Signed probation terms, firearms statement, defendant located and pointed to gun	Evidence insufficient or tainted by improper procedures	Evidence sufficient; court reasonably found defendant violated probation by possessing firearm
Whether probation condition banning firearm possession violates Second Amendment	Probation condition voluntarily accepted; probationers waive some rights	Condition infringes Second Amendment right to bear arms	Condition valid here — defendant waived Second Amendment right by accepting probation terms

Pennsylvania Bd. of Probation & Parole v. Scott, 524 U.S. 357 (1998) (exclusionary rule generally inapplicable in probation revocation proceedings)
State v. Foster, 258 Conn. 501 (2001) (probation revocation: limited role for exclusionary rule; exception for egregious misconduct)
State v. Jacobs, 229 Conn. 385 (1994) (discussing exclusionary rule and probation revocation context)
District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) (individual right to possess firearms is not unlimited)
McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010) (Heller principles incorporated against the states; longstanding prohibitions remain valid)
State v. Smith, 207 Conn. 152 (1988) (probationers have diminished privacy and must accept conditions of probation)