The mission of the Connecticut Judicial Branch is to serve the interests of justice and the public by resolving matters brought before it in a fair, timely, efficient and open manner.
Habeas Corpus Law

Habeas Appellate Court Opinion

   by Townsend, Karen

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=4267

AC42140 - Figueroa v. Commissioner of Correction (“On appeal, the petitioner claims that the court erred by concluding that (1) he failed to sustain his burden of establishing prejudice caused by his trial counsel’s failure to request an alibi instruction, (2) he failed to sustain his burden of establishing prejudice caused by his appellate counsel’s failure to argue on direct appeal that his constitutional right to a trial by jury was violated, and (3) his claim that his constitutional right to a trial by jury was violated was procedurally defaulted. We affirm the judgment of the habeas court.”)


Habeas Appellate Court Opinion

   by Townsend, Karen

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=4255

AC42932 Kelsey v. Commissioner of Correction (Good cause standard; "The petitioner claims on appeal that the habeas court improperly determined that his purported ignorance of the filing deadline set forth in § 52-470 (d) (1) and his lack of meaningful access to a law library during some portions of his term of incarceration were insufficient to demonstrate good cause to overcome the statutory presumption of unreasonable delay. We disagree and, accordingly, affirm the judgment of the habeas court."

...

"The petitioner asserted that, because of his lack of access to legal resources during segregation and lockdown and his former habeas counsel’s failure to inform him of the time limitations of § 52-470, he was unaware of the deadline for filing his second habeas petition, and this lack of knowledge necessarily established ‘good cause’ for any delay.")


Habeas Appellate Court Opinion

   by Zigadto, Janet

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=4237

AC43322 - Kondjoua v. Commissioner of Correction ("The petitioner . . . appeals following the denial of his petition for certification to appeal from the judgment of the habeas court dismissing his petition for a writ of habeas corpus as an improper successive petition pursuant to Practice Book § 23-29 (3). On appeal, the petitioner claims that the court (1) abused its discretion in denying his petition for certification to appeal and (2) improperly dismissed his habeas petition as successive. We dismiss the appeal.")


Habeas Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Zigadto, Janet

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=4215

AC43170 - Wright v. Commissioner of Correction ("The self-represented petitioner, Ian Wright, appeals following the habeas court's denial of his petition for certification to appeal from that court's dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction. On appeal, the petitioner claims that the court (1) abused its discretion in denying his petition for certification to appeal and (2) improperly concluded that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over his petition when it reasoned that the petitioner did not have a liberty interest in a deportation parole eligibility hearing pursuant to General Statutes § 54-125d. We dismiss the appeal.")


Habeas Appellate Court Opinion

   by Townsend, Karen

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=4208

AC39651 - Diaz v. Commissioner of Correction (Habeas; Alford Doctrine; “The petitioner, Raul Diaz, appeals from the judgment of the habeas court denying his amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The sole question presented by the petitioner on appeal is ‘[d]id the habeas court erroneously conclude that trial counsel’s failure to file a motion to dismiss the charge of home invasion did not constitute ineffective assistance under Strickland v. Washington [466 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 80 L. Ed. 2d 674 (1984)]?’ The petitioner had pleaded guilty to that charge pursuant to the Alford doctrine. This court, however, affirmed the judgment of the habeas court, after raising, sua sponte, the issue of whether the petitioner had waived his right to raise a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel and deciding that the petitioner did in fact waive that right by pleading guilty under the Alford doctrine.”)


Habeas Appellate Court Opinion

   by Townsend, Karen

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=4203

AC42437 - Turner v. Commissioner of Correction (“Second amended fifth petition for a writ of habeas corpus; On appeal, the petitioner claims that the habeas court abused its discretion by (1) denying his petition for certification to appeal, (2) dismissing his claim that he was deprived of a fair trial during his first habeas trial, (3) denying his claims that the prosecuting authority violated his state and federal constitutional rights by failing (a) to disclose exculpatory evidence and (b) to preserve the exculpatory evidence, and (4) denying his motion to open the judgment and disqualify the judicial authority. We dismiss the appeal”.)


Habeas Law Supreme Court Slip Opinion

   by Townsend, Karen

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=4195

SC20433 - Cookish v. Commissioner of Correction (“The habeas court, acting sua sponte and without providing the petitioner with notice or a hearing, dismissed the habeas petition pursuant to Practice Book § 23-29 for lack of jurisdiction. The habeas court determined that dismissal pursuant to § 23-29 (1) was warranted and that the petition should be returned because it was apparent, on the face of the petition, that the petitioner was not in custody for the conviction being challenged. On appeal, the petitioner asserts that the habeas court improperly (1) dismissed the petition under § 23-29 without first appointing him counsel and providing him with notice and an opportunity to be heard, and (2) failed to construe the habeas petition as a petition for a writ of error coram nobis.”)


Habeas Appellate Court Opinion

   by Townsend, Karen

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=4190

AC42515 - Anderson v. Commissioner of Correction ("On appeal, the petitioner contends that the habeas court abused its discretion by denying his petition for certification to appeal because he properly had established in his petition for a writ of habeas corpus that his constitutional right to the effective assistance of trial counsel had been violated during his criminal trial when a jury found him guilty of assault in the first degree with a firearm and assault of a peace officer with a firearm. We conclude that the habeas court did not abuse its discretion in denying the petition for certification to appeal and, accordingly, dismiss the petitioner’s appeal".)


Habeas Appellate Court Opinion

   by Townsend, Karen

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=4172

AC41886 - Schuler v. Commissioner of Correction (Appeal from the denial of petition for a writ of habeas corpus, conviction of sexual assault in the second degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-71 (a)(3). “On appeal, the petitioner claims that the court (1) abused its discretion in denying his petition for certification to appeal and (2) improperly denied his ineffective assistance of counsel claim. We dismiss the appeal.”)


Habeas Appellate Court Opinion

   by Townsend, Karen

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=4163

AC41159 - Diaz v. Commissioner of Correction (Claim that prosecutor intentionally committed violations of Brady v. Maryland; “On appeal, the petitioner claims that the court (1) abused its discretion in denying his petition for certification to appeal, (2) improperly denied his request for an evidentiary hearing, and (3) improperly denied his ineffective assistance of counsel claim. We conclude that the court properly exercised its discretion in denying the petition for certification to appeal and, accordingly, dismiss the appeal.”)


Habeas Appellate Court Opinion

   by Townsend, Karen

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=4147

AC42761 - Pentland v. Commissioner (“On appeal, the petitioner claims that the court improperly dismissed his petition for lack of subject matter jurisdiction on the ground that he already had served his sentence, and, therefore, was not ‘in custody.’ We conclude that, with respect to the convictions challenged in the amended petition, the petitioner was not in the custody of the respondent, the Commissioner of Correction. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the habeas court.")



Habeas Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Booth, George

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=4113

AC42302 - Boyd v. Commissioner of Correction (Habeas corpus; motion to dismiss; "The petitioner, Ray Boyd, appeals from the judgment of the habeas court dismissing his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, which challenged the failure of the respondent, the Commissioner of Correction, to advance the petitioner's parole eligibility date by applying statutory good time credit he has earned. On appeal, the petitioner claims that the court improperly dismissed his petition. We disagree and affirm the judgment of the court.")


Habeas Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Booth, George

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=4108

AC41867 - Budziszewski v. Connecticut Judicial Branch ("The petitioner, Piotr Budziszewski, appeals from the judgment of the habeas court denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The petitioner claims on appeal that the habeas court improperly rejected his claim that his right to effective assistance of counsel was violated by his criminal trial counsel’s failure to properly advise him of the immigration consequences of entering a guilty plea. We disagree and, accordingly, affirm the judgment of the habeas court.")


Habeas Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Booth, George

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=4098

AC42894 - Whistnant v. Commissioner of Correction (Habeas corpus; subject matter jurisdiction; "The petitioner, Jerry Lewis Whistnant, appeals following the denial of his petition for certification to appeal from the judgment of the habeas court declining to issue a writ of habeas corpus for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Practice Book § 23-24 (a) (1). On appeal, the petitioner claims that the court improperly (1) denied his petition for certification to appeal, (2) declined to issue the writ of habeas corpus pursuant to § 23-24 (a) (1) without conducting a hearing, and (3) concluded that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the claims raised in his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. We conclude that the habeas court did not abuse its discretion in denying the petitioner's petition for certification to appeal, and, therefore, we dismiss the appeal.")


Habeas Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Booth, George

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=4078

AC42384 - Stephen S. v. Commissioner of Correction (Habeas corpus; whether habeas court abused its discretion in rendering judgment declining to issue writ of habeas corpus; "The petitioner, Stephen S., appeals from the judgment of the habeas court declining to issue a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to Practice Book § 23-24 (a) (2) because the petition was "wholly frivolous on its face." On appeal, the petitioner claims that the habeas court improperly declined to issue the writ of habeas corpus because the claims raised in his current habeas petition are different from the claims raised in his two prior habeas petitions, and, therefore, his pleading is not wholly frivolous. After the parties submitted their briefs, the respondent, the Commissioner of Correction, citing to Gilchrist v. Commissioner of Correction, 334 Conn. 548, 560, 223 A.3d 368 (2020), conceded that the habeas court erroneously declined to issue the writ and concluded that the matter must be remanded to the habeas court with direction to issue the writ. We agree that a remand to the habeas court is appropriate, and, thus, the judgment is reversed and the case is remanded with direction to issue the writ of habeas corpus.")


Habeas Law Supreme Court Opinion

   by Booth, George

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=4049

SC20089 - Gomez v. Commissioner of Correction ("The dispositive question presented by this certified appeal is whether a criminal defendant's federal due process rights are violated when the state knowingly fails to correct the material, false testimony of a prosecution witness when defense counsel had actual or constructive notice that the testimony is false. We conclude that, under the circumstances of the present case, the fact that defense counsel was aware of the falsity of the testimony of two cooperating witnesses was not sufficient to protect the rights of the petitioner, Jamie Gomez, to due process of the law. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the Appellate Court, which affirmed the judgment of the habeas court denying the petitioner's second petition for a writ of habeas corpus.")


Habeas Law Appellate Court Opinions

   by Booth, George

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=4033

AC41434 - Anderson v. Commissioner of Correction (Habeas corpus; whether habeas court properly denied petition for writ of habeas corpus; claim that conditions of petitioner's confinement were illegal because he was receiving constitutionally inadequate mental health treatment; "The petitioner, Francis Anderson, appeals from the judgment of the habeas court denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, which alleged that the conditions of his confinement were illegal because he was receiving constitutionally inadequate mental health treatment while he was in the custody of the respondent, the Commissioner of Correction. On appeal, the petitioner argues that the habeas court violated his right to procedural due process under the fourteenth amendment to the United States constitution by failing to provide him adequate notice of the habeas trial and denying him a meaningful opportunity to be heard. We reverse the judgment of the habeas court.")

AC42372 - Davis v. Commissioner of Correction (Habeas corpus; whether petitioner's trial and appellate counsel rendered ineffective assistance for having failed to challenge statute (§ 53a-149) criminalizing bribery of witness as facially overbroad under novel constitutional argument that § 53a-149 could encompass legal activity such as settlement negotiations; "The petitioner, Edward V. Davis, appeals from the judgment of the habeas court denying his amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus. In this certified appeal, the petitioner claims that the court improperly rejected his claims of ineffective assistance of both trial and appellate counsel for their failure (1) to challenge General Statutes § 53a-149 as unconstitutionally overbroad on its face with respect to the charge of bribery of a witness, (2) to request a jury instruction on "true threats" with respect to the charge of breach of the peace in the second degree under General Statutes § 53a-181 (a) (3), and (3) to challenge the admissibility of the petitioner's blood test results from the hospital where he was taken after the traffic incident at issue. We affirm the judgment of the habeas court.")


Habeas Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Booth, George

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=4015

AC42250 - Jordan v. Commissioner of Correction (Habeas corpus; claim that trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance to petitioner by failing to adequately investigate and present witnesses in support of petitioner's claim of self-defense; "This appeal highlights the significant hurdle a habeas corpus petitioner faces in seeking to prove a claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel after trial counsel has died and, thus, is unavailable to provide evidence of counsel's strategic decisions regarding, inter alia, the pursuit of defenses for her client and calling witnesses in support of those defenses. The death of the petitioner's trial counsel prior to a habeas corpus trial, however, does not absolve a petitioner of his heavy burden of overcoming the strong presumption that counsel provided effective assistance. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 689, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 80 L. Ed. 2d 674 (1984); see also Slevin v. United States, 71 F. Supp. 2d 348, 358 n.9 (S.D.N.Y. 1999) ("[b]ecause the death of a petitioner's trial counsel is just as, if not more, likely to prejudice the respondent, it does not relieve the petitioner of his heavy burden of proving ineffective assistance" (internal quotation marks omitted)), aff'd, 234 F.3d 1263 (2d Cir. 2000).

The respondent, the Commissioner of Correction, appeals from the judgment of the habeas court granting a petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed by the petitioner, Bryan Jordan.The respondent claims on appeal that the habeas court improperly determined that the petitioner's trial counsel rendered ineffective legal assistance by failing to investigate adequately and to present available witnesses in support of the petitioner's claim of self-defense and, alternatively, by failing to raise the defense of third-party culpability. We agree with the respondent that the habeas court failed to hold the petitioner to the requisite burden of proof and, accordingly, reverse the judgment of the habeas court.")


Habeas Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Booth, George

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=4006

AC41987 - Woods v. Commissioner of Correction (Habeas corpus; "The petitioner, Jermaine Woods, appeals from the judgment of the habeas court dismissing his third petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The habeas court denied the petitioner's petition for certification to appeal. On appeal, the petitioner claims that the habeas court (1) abused its discretion by denying his petition for certification to appeal, (2) abused its discretion by dismissing his petition without fair notice to him and without holding a hearing on his petition, (3) erred by dismissing count one of his petition alleging that his conviction was illegal because (a) evidence of his diminished capacity was not properly presented at his criminal trial and sentencing and (b) mitigating circumstances warrant reduction of his sentence, and (4) erred by dismissing count two of his petition alleging violation of his constitutional right to equal protection. We dismiss the appeal.")


Habeas Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Booth, George

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=3986

AC42795 - Nonhuman Rights Project, Inc. v. R.W. Commerford & Sons, Inc. (Habeas corpus; whether habeas corpus jurisprudence contained indication that habeas corpus relief was intended to apply to nonhuman animal; "The petitioner, Nonhuman Rights Project, Inc., appeals from the judgment of the habeas court dismissing its petition for a writ of habeas corpus that it sought on behalf of an elephant, Minnie, who is alleged to be owned by the named respondents, R.W. Commerford & Sons, Inc. (also known as the Commerford Zoo), and its president, William R. Commerford. The petitioner argues that the court improperly dismissed its petition for a writ of habeas corpus. We conclude that the court properly dismissed the petition on the alternative ground that the petitioner lacked standing.")


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9