Barile v. Commissioner of Correction

Decision Date06 January 2004
Docket Number(AC 23511).
Citation837 A.2d 827,80 Conn. App. 787
PartiesKEITH BARILE v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION
CourtConnecticut Court of Appeals

Schaller, Dranginis and DiPentima, Js.

Arnold V. Amore, special public defender, filed a brief for the appellant (petitioner). James E. Thomas, state's attorney, Toni M. Smith-Rosario, assistant state's attorney, and Angela R. Macchiarulo, assistant state's attorney, filed a brief for the appellee (respondent).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The petitioner, Keith Barile, appeals from the judgment of the habeas court, dismissing his petition for a writ of habeas corpus in which he had alleged that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel. The court granted his petition for certification to appeal. Because the petitioner is in procedural default, having failed to raise his constitutional claim at trial or on direct appeal, we affirm the judgment of the habeas court.

The following facts are relevant to the petitioner's appeal. Very early in the morning of October 28, 1998, the petitioner attempted to rob a restaurant in Vernon, which resulted in a number of serious charges being lodged against him in addition to violation of probation. The eyewitnesses and victims gave statements to the police, and the petitioner's disguise was found in the motor vehicle he was operating. The court concluded that the state's case against the petitioner was strong. His counsel had negotiated a plea agreement under which the petitioner would receive a total effective sentence of twenty-five years incarceration, execution suspended after twenty-one years, with five years of probation and the right to argue for less at sentencing. On March 30, 1999, pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, the petitioner pleaded guilty to one count of robbery in the first degree, one count of assault in the second degree, six counts of kidnapping in the first degree with a firearm and one count of operating a motor vehicle while his license was under suspension.1 After receiving a presentence investigation and alternative sentencing report, the trial court sentenced the petitioner to twenty-five years incarceration, execution suspended after eighteen years, with five years of probation. The petitioner also was sentenced to twelve years of incarceration for violation of probation relative to six other convictions, which was a concurrent sentence.

The petitioner sought habeas corpus relief, alleging that his guilty plea was not made knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily because he was denied the effective assistance of counsel due to counsel's failure to obtain copies of the victims' statements for him to read.2 In response, the respondent commissioner of correction alleged that the petitioner was not eligible for habeas corpus relief because he did not raise his claim at sentencing or subsequently pursuant to Practice Book § 43-22 or on direct appeal. The respondent also alleged that the petitioner was unable to establish cause for the procedural default or prejudice to excuse the default, citing Jackson v. Commissioner of Correction, 227 Conn. 124, 629 A.2d 413 (1993) (default on appeal), and Johnson v. Commissioner of Correction, 218 Conn. 403, 589 A.2d 1214 (1991) (default at trial).3 We agree with the respondent.

The petitioner has challenged his sentence for the first time in his amended habeas petition. He did not file a direct appeal and did not file a motion to correct his sentence pursuant to Practice Book § 43-22. The petitioner could have filed such a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Johnson v. Commissioner of Correction, No. 17883.
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • 26 d2 Fevereiro d2 2008
    ...The court further concluded that the petitioner had not shown the cause and prejudice required under Barile v. Commissioner of Correction, 80 Conn. App. 787, 789-90, 837 A.2d 827 (relying on Wainwright v. Sykes, supra, 433 U.S. at 87), 97 S.Ct. 2497, cert. denied, 268 Conn. 915, 847 A.2d 31......
  • State Of Conn. v. Parker
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • 27 d2 Abril d2 2010
    ... ... denied, 281 Conn. 912, ... 916 A.2d 54 (2007); Parker v. Commissioner of Correction , 83 Conn ... App. 905, 853 A.2d 652 (2004) (habeas relief), cert ... denied, ... ineffective assistance of counsel claims solely relating to sentencing ... See Barile v. Commissioner of Correction , 80 Conn. App. 787, ... 789-90, 837 A.2d 827 (concluding that ... ...
  • State v. Parker, (SC 18432) (Conn. 4/27/2010)
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • 27 d2 Abril d2 2010
    ...vehicle to resolve ineffective assistance of counsel claims solely relating to sentencing. See Barile v. Commissioner of Correction, 80 Conn. App. 787, 789-90, 837 A.2d 827 (concluding that petitioner had procedurally defaulted on habeas claim of ineffective assistance of counsel due to cou......
  • Inmate v. Commissioner of Correction
    • United States
    • Connecticut Superior Court
    • 1 d4 Dezembro d4 2016
    ... ... (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) ... Id. , 568 ... Failure ... to raise a constitutional claim at the trial level or on ... direct appeal prior to bringing a habeas action constitutes ... procedural default. Barile v. Commissioner of ... Correction , 80 Conn.App. 787, 788, 837 A.2d 827, cert ... denied, 268 Conn. 915, 847 A.2d 310 (2004). " When a ... respondent seeks to raise an affirmative defense of ... procedural default, the rules of practice require that he or ... she must ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT