183 Conn. App. 669
Conn. App. Ct.2018Background
- On Sept. 10, 2013, two men approached a group near Trumbull Gardens in Bridgeport and opened fire; one victim (Pettway) died and others were wounded. Several victims identified Roderick Rogers (defendant) as a shooter.
- Defendant and codefendant Raashon Jackson were tried jointly; Anderson (driver/cousin) testified for the state that he drove the defendant and Jackson to and from the scene and heard gunfire.
- The state presented maps and testimony from Sergeant Andrew Weaver showing cell/GPS-based location data for Anderson, the defendant, and Jackson; Weaver used GeoTime and other data sources.
- Jackson moved to exclude evidence that a firearm used in the shooting was later found in a third party’s possession; the trial court granted the state’s motion. Rogers did not join that objection or introduce the evidence himself.
- Defense counsel sought to cross-examine Anderson about an alleged text referencing .38 shells; the court sustained the state’s relevancy objection after a proffer. Rogers argued on appeal that exclusion violated his Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment right to present a defense.
- Rogers also moved pretrial to preclude cell-tower "ping" evidence and requested a Porter hearing; the record does not show a distinct ruling on his motion or that he requested a Porter hearing at trial, and he did not object during Weaver’s testimony.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Court precluded evidence that a firearm was later found on a third party | State: evidence irrelevant; no direct connection to the shooting | Rogers: exclusion prevented showing third-party culpability (firearm linked to someone else) | Not reviewable — Rogers failed to preserve by not joining codefendant’s motion or offering the evidence himself |
| Exclusion of cross-examination about text message on Anderson’s phone | State: proffered text not shown relevant; foundation lacking | Rogers: text (request for .38 shells) tended to show Anderson’s involvement as a shooter, implicating right to present a defense | Unpreserved relevance claim; even if reviewed under Golding, fails (claim is evidentiary not constitutional) |
| Admission of Weaver’s cell/GPS maps and testimony without a Porter hearing | State: Rogers did not preserve specific Porter request at trial; any error harmless | Rogers: Edwards requires qualifying the witness and a Porter hearing for scientific cell-data methods; lack of hearing rendered maps inadmissible and affected verdict | Unpreserved; even if error, harmless — Weaver’s evidence was cumulative and corroborated by eyewitnesses, GPS bracelet, and surveillance footage |
| Whether excluded/admitted evidence substantially affected verdict | State: other strong, unchallenged evidence (eyewitness IDs, Anderson’s testimony, surveillance) | Rogers: contested credibility and claimed constitutional impact | Court: No substantial effect; nonconstitutional errors harmless under the record |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Golding, 213 Conn. 233 (Conn. 1989) (framework for appellate review of unpreserved constitutional claims)
- State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57 (Conn. 1997) (Porter hearing requirement for scientific/technical expert testimony)
- State v. Edwards, 325 Conn. 97 (Conn. 2017) (police officer must be qualified as an expert and Porter hearing required for cell-phone/tower evidence)
- State v. Gould, 241 Conn. 1 (Conn. 1997) (defendant must join codefendant’s motion to preserve nonconstitutional issue raised by codefendant)
- State v. Hedge, 297 Conn. 621 (Conn. 2010) (third-party culpability evidence admissible only with a direct connection to the crime)
- State v. Holley, 327 Conn. 576 (Conn. 2018) (limits of confrontation/compulsory-process rights where evidence is inadmissible under rules of evidence)
- State v. Miranda, 327 Conn. 451 (Conn. 2018) (preservation rule for evidentiary objections at trial)