147 Conn. App. 510
Conn. App. Ct.2014Background
- Ian Wright was convicted of murder and illegal pistol possession and sentenced to 35 years; his conviction was affirmed on direct appeal.
- Wright filed a first habeas petition alleging ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel; that petition was denied and the denial was affirmed on appeal in Wright v. Commissioner of Correction.
- Wright subsequently filed additional habeas petitions and consolidated them; he filed an amended petition with four counts: (1) ineffective assistance of habeas trial counsel (first habeas), (2) ineffective assistance of trial counsel (underlying criminal trial), (3) ineffective assistance of appellate counsel (direct appeal), and (4) ineffective assistance of habeas appellate counsel (first habeas).
- The respondent moved to dismiss counts two and three as successive under Practice Book § 23-29(3); Judge Newson dismissed those counts as presenting the same grounds as the prior petition and not stating new facts or proffering new evidence.
- Wright argued the claims were not successive because they raised constitutional violations not previously asserted and because Judge Fuger had not adjudicated those claims on the merits; Judge Newson disagreed and proceeded to trial on counts one and four, which he denied after a hearing.
- Wright sought certification to appeal the dismissal of counts two and three; certification was denied and this appeal followed, which the appellate court dismissed for lack of merit.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counts alleging ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel were successive under Practice Book § 23-29(3) | Wright: Claims are not successive because prior habeas counsel did not raise the same constitutional theories and prior court did not adjudicate merits | Commissioner: Counts repeat the same legal grounds and seek the same relief as in the first petition; no new facts/evidence were proffered | Court: Dismissal affirmed — counts were successive and properly dismissed |
| Whether prior habeas court (Judge Fuger) adjudicated the ineffective-assistance claims on the merits | Wright: Fuger did not adjudicate counts on the merits; thus they were not previously decided | Commissioner: Record shows Fuger rendered a merits judgment denying ineffective assistance claims | Court: Found the record indicates a merits adjudication by Judge Fuger; Newson did not err |
| Whether an evidentiary hearing was required before dismissing successive counts | Wright: Hearing needed to show prior claims weren’t adjudicated on the merits | Commissioner: No hearing required when petition repeats same grounds without new facts/evidence | Court: Wright had opportunity to present evidence but did not; dismissal without further hearing was proper |
| Whether denial of certification to appeal was an abuse of discretion | Wright: Certification should have been granted to review dismissal of counts two and three | Commissioner: No abuse; dismissal was correct under controlling rules and precedent | Court: No abuse of discretion; appeal dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Wright v. Commissioner of Correction, 106 Conn. App. 342 (appellate decision affirming denial of Wright's first habeas petition) (summary of prior habeas adjudication)
- Jefferson v. Commissioner of Correction, 99 Conn. App. 321 (discussing standard for abuse of discretion when habeas court denies certification to appeal)
- Carter v. Commissioner of Correction, 109 Conn. App. 300 (explaining successive habeas petition rule: second petition must state new facts or proffer new evidence)
- Negron v. Warden, 180 Conn. 153 (describing Practice Book § 23-29 successive-petition dismissal and when hearing is not legally required)