AC47034 - Lisboa v. Commissioner of Correction (“On appeal, the petitioner claims that the court (1) abused its discretion in denying his petition for certification to appeal, (2) incorrectly concluded that he failed to establish good cause within the meaning of § 52-470 (e) for his late filed petition, and (3) improperly denied his request for appointed counsel for the good cause hearing. We dismiss the appeal.”)

AC46901 - White v. Commissioner of Correction (Conviction of home invasion; conspiracy to commit burglary; robbery in the first degree; tampering with a witness; “He claims on appeal that the court improperly (1) denied his freestanding constitutional claim asserting, pursuant to McCoy v. Louisiana, 584 U.S. 414, 138 S. Ct. 1500, 200 L. Ed. 2d 821 (2018), that his criminal trial counsel violated his right to client autonomy under the sixth amendment to the United States constitution by effectively conceding the petitioner’s guilt to the conspiracy to commit burglary charge during closing argument without obtaining his consent to do so and despite his desire to maintain his innocence; (2) concluded that his criminal trial counsel did not provide ineffective assistance by (a) conceding the petitioner’s guilt during closing argument and/or failing to object to the prosecutor’s characterization of that concession during rebuttal closing argument; (b) failing to attack adequately the credibility of one of the petitioner’s alleged coconspirators, Trayvon Dunning, during Dunning’s cross-examination, or to object to the admission into evidence of an unredacted copy of a cooperation agreement between Dunning and the state in exchange for Dunning’s testimony against the petitioner; (c) failing to seek the dismissal of all charges on the ground that the state had monitored and recorded his prison telephone calls while the petitioner was self-represented and failing to seek to suppress the state’s use of such recordings; and (d) failing to object to the trial court’s canvass regarding his waiver of his right to self-representation; and (3) excluded as irrelevant Dunning’s proffered testimony that the gun used during the commission of the underlying crimes was fake. For the reasons that follow, we reject the petitioner’s claims and affirm the judgment of the habeas court.”)