Opinion
Nos. CV02-0459846S, CV03-0488717S
June 3, 2005
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
There are two files presented for consideration of the Court. The same detailed Amended Petition has been filed in each case, and the two files concern the same underlying case. A Motion to Consolidate the two files in New Haven was granted subject to the acceptance of the consolidation by the presiding judge of civil matters in New Haven. This acceptance was granted and the Rockville file was transferred to New Haven.
Initially the Petitioner was represented by a special public defender. Prior to the trial on the criminal charges filed against the Petitioner in an information, the Petitioner who was then represented by a public defender moved for the dismissal of the public defender so that he could defend himself. His motion was granted and he proceeded to act pro se in the trial. The public defender, however, was appointed as stand-by counsel for the Petitioner.
The Petitioner was convicted by the jury and was sentenced by the trial judge to a total effective sentence of ten years to serve and ten years special parole. In addition to the counts that the jury found the Petitioner guilty of and, after the jury verdict was rendered, the Petitioner also pled guilty to being a persistent serious felony offender.
The Petitioner in paragraph 21 of his Amended Petition sets forth the following:
Appellate's counsel's representation was ineffective in that he failed to brief the trial court's failure to give a verbally requested jury instruction on lesser included offenses despite the trial court's treatment of his oral motion as a proper request, even though there was noncompliance with the Connecticut Practice Book sections 42-16 to 42-19.
It is the opinion of this, the habeas court, that the Appellate Court gave the Petitioner full, fair and complete treatment and consideration of all issues raised during the trial of this case and the appeals taken thereafter. In addition to all of the foregoing, attention and consideration must be given to the Supreme Court's decision in this case found in State of Connecticut v. Kenneth Porter, in 264 Conn. 910 (2003), the Supreme Court stating only "The defendant's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 76 Conn.App. 477 (A.C. 22802) is denied.
With regard to the care and concern of the Appellate Court for criminal defendants the following is cited from 76 Conn. 477 at 495:
Although it may be settled law that a criminal defendant has an absolute right to self-representation, that right is not self-executing. A trial court in this state must satisfy itself that several criteria have been met before a criminal defendant properly may be allowed to waive counsel and proceed pro se.
Note: Court's opinion elaborates in further detail.
Accordingly, there is no finding in the decision of the Appellate Court and this habeas court that there was any ineffective assistance of counsel that would have resulted in a change of the outcome of the trial or the appeal.
Accordingly, the petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied and judgment may enter for the respondent.
John Ottaviano, Jr. Judge Trial Referee