State v. Guerrera

9 Citing cases

  1. State v. Guerrera

    331 Conn. 628 (Conn. 2019)   Cited 9 times
    Holding that Department of Correction was investigative arm of state for percentage of codefendant's phone recordings reviewed at prosecution's direction, but not for percentage of recordings stored solely for its internal security and administrative purposes

    In a trial to the court, the defendant was found in violation of probation. On appeal, the Appellate Court affirmed the judgments of the trial court; State v. Guerrera , 167 Conn. App. 74, 120, 142 A.3d 447 (2016) ; and we granted the defendant's petition for certification to appeal, limited to the question of whether the Appellate Court properly determined "that the state's attorney's obligation to review [the state's] own investigatory file for Brady ... material ... applies [only when] the defendant can first make a ‘showing’ that the file contains exculpatory information ...." State v. Guerrera , 323 Conn. 922, 150 A.3d 1152 (2016).

  2. Marquez v. Comm'r of Corr.

    170 Conn. App. 231 (Conn. App. Ct. 2017)   Cited 4 times

    (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Guerrera, 167 Conn.App. 74, 79 n.1, 142 A.3d 447, cert. granted, 323 Conn. 922, 150 A.3d 1152 (2016). Our Supreme Court has held that the obligation to disclose favorable evidence includes such evidence as to the existence of any plea agreement between the state and a key witness.

  3. State v. Joseph V.

    345 Conn. 516 (Conn. 2022)   Cited 3 times

    (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Guerrera , 167 Conn. App. 74, 110, 142 A.3d 447 (2016), aff'd, 331 Conn. 628, 206 A.3d 160 (2019).

  4. State v. Lamantia

    336 Conn. 747 (Conn. 2020)   Cited 9 times
    Summarizing history and circumstances of 2015 amendment to § 53a-155

    us of the relevant police investigation. See, e.g., State v. Jordan , 314 Conn. 354, 383, 102 A.3d 1 (2014) ("when an individual knows that there is significant evidence connecting him to the crime, a jury reasonably could infer that the individual believed that the investigation probably would progress into an official proceeding"); State v. Foreshaw , 214 Conn. 540, 543, 550–51, 572 A.2d 1006 (1990) (jury reasonably could have found that defendant believed an official proceeding was about to be instituted when she discarded murder weapon because, after she shot and killed victim in presence of numerous eyewitnesses, she told police that she had discarded weapon "so that she would not be caught with it"); State v. Mark , supra, 170 Conn. App. at 253, 154 A.3d 564 ("the defendant knew that the victim's body was lying on the sidewalk in public view; surely the defendant was aware that an investigation and official proceeding probably would ensue when someone found the victim's body"); State v. Guerrera , 167 Conn. App. 74, 105, 142 A.3d 447 (2016) ("the jury could have inferred that the defendant was aware that a criminal prosecution was probable in light of the number of witnesses who had seen him with the victim, the threats he made to those witnesses to try to silence them, his knowledge that [his brother] told people about killing the victim, and his firsthand knowledge of the murder and the assault"), aff'd, 331 Conn. 628, 206 A.3d 160 (2019) ; State v. Njoku , 163 Conn. App. 134, 139–42, 133 A.3d 906 (holding that evidence was sufficient to sustain defendant's conviction of tampering with witness because, after rape of victim, execution of search warrant and collection of defendant's DNA, defendant asked intermediary to visit victim's family and to "try to convince them ... [to] reach an agreement outside the court with him" (internal quotation marks omitted)), cert. denied, 321 Conn. 912, 136 A.3d 644 (2016) ; State v. Pommer , 110 Conn. App. 608, 619–20, 955 A.2d 637 (evidence was sufficient to establish that defendant

  5. State v. Guerrera

    150 A.3d 1153 (Conn. 2016)

    Jonathan M. Sousa, special deputy assistant state's attorney, in opposition.The defendant's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 167 Conn.App. 74, 142 A.3d 447 (2016), is denied.

  6. State v. Guerrera

    323 Conn. 922 (Conn. 2016)   Cited 3 times

    Jonathan M. Sousa, special deputy assistant state's attorney, in opposition.The defendant's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 167 Conn.App. 74, 142 A.3d 447 (2016), is granted, limited to the following issue:"Did the Appellate Court properly find that the state's attorney's obligation to review its own investigatory file for Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 87, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), material only applies where the defendant can first make a ‘showing’ that the file contains exculpatory information?"

  7. State v. Orr

    199 Conn. App. 427 (Conn. App. Ct. 2020)   Cited 2 times

    ’ (Emphasis added; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Guerrera , 167 Conn. App. 74, 87, 142 A.3d 447 (2016), aff'd, 331 Conn. 628, 206 A.3d 160 (2019). ‘‘If ... the [defendant] has failed to meet his burden as to one of the three prongs of the Brady test, then we must conclude that a Brady violation has not occurred.’

  8. State v. Mark

    170 Conn. App. 241 (Conn. App. Ct. 2017)   Cited 4 times

    A number of witnesses testified at trial that the defendant said that he had murdered or that he thought that he had murdered the victim with a rock, which supports the inference that the defendant knew that there was a strong possibility that witnesses could testify in an official proceeding. See State v. Guerrera , 167 Conn.App. 74, 105, 142 A.3d 447 (jury reasonably could have inferred that defendant was aware that criminal prosecution was probable in part because of number of witnesses who saw defendant with victim), cert. granted on other grounds, 323 Conn. 922, 150 A.3d 1152 (2016). Ruiz testified, moreover, that the defendant told her, after the defendant disposed of the rock, that he was afraid that too many people were aware that he committed the murder and that he was afraid that they would talk, presumably to law enforcement.

  9. Nieves v. Comm'r of Corr.

    169 Conn. App. 587 (Conn. App. Ct. 2016)   Cited 3 times

    (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Guerrera , 167 Conn.App. 74, 99, 142 A.3d 447, cert. granted on other grounds, 323 Conn. 922, 150 A.3d 1152 (2016). As Quinones' subsequent statement identifying the petitioner as the shooter probably could have been admitted under several scenarios, we must reject the petitioner's argument.