150 Conn.App. 53
Conn. App. Ct.2014Background
- Craig Wilson was convicted by a jury of six narcotics offenses; this court affirmed and the Supreme Court denied certification.
- Wilson filed a three‑count amended habeas petition alleging: ineffective assistance of trial counsel (LaPierre), ineffective assistance of appellate counsel (Pattis and Coleman), and prosecutorial impropriety for alleged nondisclosure.
- A one‑day habeas trial was held; testimony included Wilson, trial and appellate counsel, and the trial prosecutor.
- The habeas court credited LaPierre's testimony about investigation, plea negotiations, and trial strategy, finding no deficient performance and thus did not reach prejudice under Strickland.
- The court credited appellate counsel's testimony that they researched the record and appealed the three best issues; it found those ineffective‑assistance claims meritless.
- The prosecutorial‑impropriety claim was deemed abandoned for lack of evidence; the habeas petition and certification to appeal were denied, and this appeal was dismissed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance of trial counsel | LaPierre failed to investigate witnesses/defenses, advise on plea/evidence, and present exculpatory proof | LaPierre conducted substantial investigation, negotiated a 5‑year offer Wilson rejected, and made reasonable strategic choices | Habeas court credited LaPierre; performance not deficient; claim denied |
| Ineffective assistance of appellate counsel | Pattis/Coleman failed to raise/research/brief all possible issues on appeal | Appellate counsel reviewed record, researched law, and appealed the three best issues | Court found appellate‑counsel claims devoid of merit; denied |
| Prosecutorial impropriety / Brady claim | Prosecutor failed to disclose exculpatory evidence/reports | No evidence presented at habeas trial to support nondisclosure; claim abandoned | Habeas court concluded claim was abandoned for lack of evidence; denied |
| Denial of certification to appeal | Certification should be granted because issues are debatable among jurists | Habeas court properly exercised discretion; issues not sufficiently debatable | Appellate court held petitioner failed Simms test; dismissal affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance standard: deficient performance + prejudice)
- Simms v. Warden, 230 Conn. 608 (test for appellate review when habeas court denies certification to appeal)
- Gregory v. Commissioner of Correction, 111 Conn. App. 430 (application of Strickland principles in Connecticut appellate context)
- Perry v. Commissioner of Correction, 131 Conn. App. 792 (standards for reviewing denial of certification to appeal)