State v. Mungroo, 11 A.3d 132

In March 2002, Nazra Mungroo worked as general cashier and income auditor at a Hartford Hilton and helped handle a robbery incident.
The hotel was robbed of over $100,000; Mungroo reported the robbery and was taken to Hartford Hospital claiming diabetic-related symptoms.
She was absent briefly, then returned to work, taking sick leave from May 2002 and later receiving workers' compensation benefits exceeding $5,000.
Investigators later found that Mungroo participated in staging the robbery, leading to convictions for first-degree larceny and falsely reporting an incident.
Mungroo was charged with fraudulent receipt of workers' compensation benefits for omitting material facts about the true circumstances of the injury.
A jury convicted her of fraudulent receipt of workers' compensation benefits; she was sentenced to one year in prison to be served consecutively.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether waiver of instructional-error claim was proper	Mungroo argues waiv er bad under Golding post-Kitchens.	Mungroo says Ebron governs unpreserved claims and requires review unless induced.	Waiver proper; Golding-based review foreclosed
Whether defense counsel could waive the claim on defendant's behalf	Counsel’s participation cannot bind defendant to waive a constitutional right.	Counsel acted within authority when reviewing and accepting proposed charges.	Counsel’s waiver valid; defendant’s right waived under Kitchens

State v. Kitchens, 299 Conn. 447 (2011) (redefines waiver when counsel reviews drafts and accepts instructions)
State v. Ebron, 292 Conn. 656 (2009) (unpreserved claims reviewed unless defense induced error)
State v. Golding, 213 Conn. 233 (1989) (constitutional claims may be reviewed if four-part test satisfied)
State v. Holness, 289 Conn. 535 (2008) (counsel may waive constitutional claims in exercising professional judgment)
State v. Tomas D., 296 Conn. 476 (2010) (Golding framework and review principles discussed)