State v. Otto
305 Conn. 51
| Conn. | 2012Background
- Victim Shamaia Smith disappeared March 14, 2007 after leaving the dancer job and personal relationship with Otto.
- Police linked OTTO to the case via voicemails and calls to the victim’s family home.
- Investigation revealed Otto owned a Stafford property with a trailer and fire pit suitable for concealing remains.
- Police found remains and evidence at the Stafford site, including a burnt trailer, bone fragments, tissue, and weapons linked to Otto.
- DNA testing confirmed victim’s remains and blood on items matched the victim’s parents; ballistic testing connected shell casings to Otto’s firearm.
- Otto was convicted of murder and two counts of tampering with evidence; sentence totaled sixty years plus concurrent terms.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was sufficient evidence of specific intent to kill | State argues cumulative circumstantial evidence supports intent. | Otto contends lack of cause/manner evidence precludes intent. | Yes; sufficient circumstantial evidence supported intent. |
| Whether prosecutorial closing arguments improperly shifted burden on intent | State contends remarks framed intent from evidence, not burden shift. | Otto argues remarks implied punishment for destroying evidence. | No; arguments not improper in context. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Sivri, 231 Conn. 115 (Conn. 1994) (inference of intent from circumstantial evidence and conduct)
- State v. Gary, 273 Conn. 393 (Conn. 2005) (intent to kill may be inferred from motive and conduct)
- State v. Grant, 219 Conn. 596 (Conn. 1991) (cumulative proof approach to beyond reasonable doubt)
- State v. Chace, 199 Conn. 102 (Conn. 1986) (evidence of cause and manner supporting intent)
- State v. Crafts, 226 Conn. 237 (Conn. 1993) (precludes required planning evidence in some intent cases)
- State v. Tomasko, 238 Conn. 253 (Conn. 1996) (death caused by shooting supports inferred intent)
- State v. Joly, 219 Conn. 234 (Conn. 1991) (consciousness of guilt as evidence to infer intent)
- State v. Brown, 299 Conn. 640 (Conn. 2011) (prosecutorial conduct reviewed with deference to counsel argument)