AC43208 - Stafford v. Commissioner of Correction (“On appeal, the petitioner claims that the court improperly
dismissed his petition on the grounds that (1) the court lacked subject matter
jurisdiction because the petitioner failed to state a claim involving the deprivation
of a recognized liberty interest, and (2) the petition was rendered moot by a
witness’ testimony at the habeas trial. We agree with both jurisdictional
claims and, accordingly, reverse the judgment of the habeas court and remand
with direction to render judgment stating that the petitioner is parole
eligible.”)
AC43105 - Finney v. Commissioner of Correction (The petitioner claims that the court improperly dismissed his habeas petition pursuant to Practice Book § 23-29 (2) on the ground that the petition failed to state a claim on which habeas relief could be granted. The respondent, the Commissioner of Correction, both refutes the petitioner’s claim and raises as an alternative ground for affirmance that, even if the petition raises a cognizable claim for habeas relief, the court should have dismissed the petition as untimely filed in accordance with General Statutes § 52-470. We agree with the petitioner that the habeas court improperly dismissed the petition pursuant to Practice Book § 23-29 (2). We also agree that, in resolving the court’s order to show cause why the petition should be permitted to proceed in accordance with § 52-470, the habeas court improperly determined that the petition was filed within the prescribed statutory time limit. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the habeas court and remand the case with direction (1) to deny the court’s own motion to dismiss and (2) to conduct a new hearing to determine, in accordance with § 52-470 (e), whether the petitioner can demonstrate good cause for the delay in filing the petition and, if not, to dismiss the petition on that basis.”)