State v. Terry
128 A.3d 958
Conn. App. Ct.2015Background
- On May 2, 2012, defendant Reginald Terry stabbed Herman Waden in the chest outside a Hartford apartment complex; Waden survived and gave a hospital statement to police. Terry was arrested two weeks later and convicted by a jury of first‑degree assault; sentenced to 15 years plus 5 years special parole.
- Terry claimed self‑defense at trial, stating Waden confronted him, kept following him, and dug in his pockets, prompting Terry to draw a knife; Terry admitted in a voluntary statement that he would have shot Waden if he had a gun.
- Waden testified he was attacked, admitted prior convictions and recent cocaine use, and said his hospital statement was given while medicated and in pain. Defense impeached Waden on convictions, substance use, and inconsistencies with his hospital statement.
- Trial court instructed the jury on self‑defense and excluded some cross‑examination about the precise details of Waden’s criminal record when elicited through the investigating officer. A curative instruction misspoke (referenced defendant’s past instead of victim’s) but defendant did not object.
- On appeal Terry argued (1) insufficiency of evidence to disprove self‑defense, (2) erroneous jury instruction limiting use of victim’s convictions, (3) improper limitation of cross‑examination of the detective about the victim’s record, and (4) prejudicial curative instruction. The Appellate Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Terry) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence re: self‑defense | Evidence disproved justification beyond reasonable doubt; jury could credit victim and reject defendant’s account | Terry argued state failed to disprove self‑defense and failure to show he could safely retreat | Affirmed: viewing evidence favorably to verdict, jury reasonably rejected self‑defense and found retreat was available |
| Jury instruction re: victim’s convictions limited to credibility | State argued convictions were for credibility only and instruction was proper | Terry argued convictions were also relevant to show defendant’s reasonable belief and that victim was aggressor | Not reviewed on merits: defendant implicitly waived challenge by accepting proposed charge under Kitchens doctrine |
| Limiting cross‑examination of detective about victim’s criminal record | State argued lack of foundation and relevance; trial court sustained objection | Terry argued Code of Evidence §§4‑4(a)(2) and 4‑5(d) allowed the inquiry and limitation was abuse of discretion | Unpreserved on appeal; court declined review (and would find any error harmless) |
| Curative instruction misspeaking (referenced defendant rather than victim) | State: curative instruction was minor and juries presumed to follow instructions | Terry: misspeaking prejudiced confrontation and presentation of defense | Unpreserved; declined under Golding and plain error doctrines — not shown to be manifestly unjust or likely to mislead jury |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Kitchens, 299 Conn. 447 (trial counsel’s acceptance of proposed jury charge can constitute implicit waiver of instructional claims)
- State v. Golding, 213 Conn. 233 (framework for review of unpreserved constitutional claims)
- State v. Revels, 313 Conn. 762 (standard for reviewing sufficiency claims when justification defense asserted)
- State v. Prioleau, 235 Conn. 274 (clarifies subjective/objective two‑step self‑defense inquiry)
- State v. Gray, 221 Conn. 713 (jury may reject defendant’s theory where evidence conflicts)