Tutson v. Commissioner of Correction, 144 Conn. App. 203

Trendel Tutson challenges a habeas court’s denial of certification to appeal from a denial of his habeas petition.
He alleged trial counsel’s ineffective assistance, improper handling of the alibi defense, and ineffective identifications affecting trial fairness.
The habeas court rejected the ineffective-assistance claim for several trial-time issues but restored his right to sentence review.
Tutson sought certification to appeal under § 52-470 and was denied, prompting this appeal.
The court limits review to issues raised in the petition for certification and determines whether the denial was an abuse of discretion under Lozada/Simms standards.
The underlying conviction, for attempted murder and assault in the first degree, was affirmed after remand proceedings and later reviewed by the Supreme Court, with factual summaries of the shooting and alibi-related evidence set forth in prior opinions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the habeas court abused discretion in denying certification to appeal	Tutson argues the issues are debatable; certification should be granted	The court corrects for limited de novo review; issues not properly raised cannot be reviewed	No abuse; issues not raised cannot be reviewed
Whether the court read all exhibits and avoided gross factual errors	The court allegedly ignored exhibits leading to factual errors	Claim not raised in petition for certification; cannot review	Claim not reviewable; not analyzed on merits
Whether trial counsel’s mishandling of the alibi defense was prejudicial	Reid failed to present Rooty Thomas’s alibi testimony which could exonerate	Findings showed any alibi testimony would not have prejudiced the outcome	No reversible error; prejudice not shown
Whether petitioner received effective assistance regarding identification procedures and alibi strategy	Claims of failure to suppress showups and to pursue alibi defense	Portions not raised in petition; merits not reached; some identifications addressed on record	Petition denied on these grounds; merits not reached for unresolved aspects

Simms v. Warden, 229 Conn. 178 (1994) (standard for abuse of discretion in certification determinations; Lozada framework)
Lozada v. Deeds, 498 U.S. 430 (1991) (set of Lozada factors for habeas certification review)
State v. Tutson, 84 Conn. App. 610 (2004) (earlier determination on defense timing and alibi issues; remand history)
State v. Tutson, 99 Conn. App. 655 (2007) (affirmation of conviction after remand; trial record context)
Castonguay v. Commissioner of Correction, 300 Conn. 649 (2011) (standard for reviewing habeas decisions and merits backdrop)
Perry v. Commissioner of Correction, 131 Conn. App. 792 (2011) (review of certification and waiver considerations)
Mercado v. Commissioner of Correction, 85 Conn. App. 869 (2004) (amended petitions and review limitations on certification)