141 Conn. App. 270
Conn. App. Ct.2013Background
- On June 9, 2010, the defendant and his fiancée had a domestic dispute in their apartment; Tiffany Channer intervened and was assaulted by Solomon, who grabbed her around the neck and scratched her chest.
- Channer reported the incident to police; Karwoski and Channer described the defendant’s assault, leading to an arrest and charges of assault in the third degree and two counts of disorderly conduct, plus a later charge as a persistent offender.
- The defendant testified on his own behalf, asserting religious norms limited contact with women other than his wife and denying touching Channer; he acknowledged a 2003 felony conviction but claimed reform.
- During cross-examination, the state sought to impeach the defendant with a 2006 third-degree assault conviction related to an incident with his then-wife; the court initially limited questioning but allowed some impeachment once the defendant opened the door.
- The trial court concluded the defendant opened the door to the 2006 conviction by his testimony and permitted impeachment, culminating in a limiting instruction to the jury.
- Following trial, the defendant pleaded guilty to being a persistent offender; the trial court imposed an aggregate sentence of three years’ imprisonment, and the judgment was affirmed on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the defendant opened the door to prior convictions for impeachment | Solomon opened the door by testimony that affected credibility. | Admission of prior offenses was improper and overly prejudicial. | Court allowed impeachment; not abuse of discretion. |
| Whether admission of the 2006 assault conviction violated due process or prejudiced the defendant | Impeachment evidence was proper due to door-opening and credibility relevance. | Evidence was overly prejudicial and should have been excluded. | Limiting instruction and balancing prejudice upheld admission. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Hernandez, 224 Conn. 196 (1992) (opening door relevance of credibility and cross-examination allowed)
- State v. Phillips, 102 Conn. App. 716 (2007) (opening the door and rebuttal impeachment considerations)
- State v. Griggs, 288 Conn. 116 (2008) (presumption of jury following limiting instructions regarding prejudice)