Bennett v. Comm'r of Corr.

• Docket Number: AC 46491
• Decision Date: 05 December 2023
• Parties: ERICK BENNETT v. COMMISSIONEROF CORRECTION
• Court: Connecticut Court of Appeals

1

ERICK BENNETT
v.
COMMISSIONEROF CORRECTION

No. AC 46491

Court of Appeals of Connecticut

December 5, 2023

Argued November 16, 2023

Procedural History

Amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus, brought to the Superior Court in the judicial district of Tolland and tried to the court, Bhatt, J.; judgment denying the petition; thereafter, the court, Newson, J., denied the petitioner's motion to open or vacate the judgment; subsequently, the court, Newson, J., denied the petition for certification to appeal, and the petitioner appealed to this court. Appeal dismissed.

Erich Bennett, self-represented, the appellant (petitioner).

Timothy F. Costetto, supervisory assistant state's attorney, with whom, on the brief, were John P. Doyle, Jr., state's attorney, Craig P. Nowak, supervisory assistant state's attorney, and Adrienne Russo, senior assistant state's attorney, for the appellee (respondent).

Moll, Clark and Seeley, Js.

2

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

The self-represented petitioner, Erick Bennett, appeals, following the denial of his petition for certification to appeal, from the judgment of the habeas court denying his motion to open and/or vacate the judgment denying his third amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus (motion to open). Although the petitioner challenges the merits of the habeas court's denial of his motion to open, he has failed to brief the threshold issue of whether the habeas court abused its discretion in denying his petition for certification to appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss the petitioner's appeal.

The following facts and procedural history are relevant to our resolution of this appeal. On September 28, 2018, the self-represented petitioner, a sentenced prisoner, filed his third amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus in which he asserted approximately eleven claims, including but not limited to: (1) ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel; (2) violations of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 87, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963); (3) judicial bias; (4) due process violations; and (5) actual innocence. On June 15,2021, following a trial and the submission of posttrial briefs, the habeas court, Bhatt, J., denied the petition. Upon the habeas court's grant of certification to appeal from the denial of his habeas petition, the petitioner filed an appeal on October 7,2021 (prior habeas appeal). In a decision released on February 7, 2023, this court affirmed the judgment of the habeas court. See Bennett v. Commissioner of Correction, 217 Conn.App. 901, 287 A.3d 1157, cert, denied, 346 Conn. 1019, 292 A.3d 1255 (2023).

Meanwhile, during the pendency of the prior habeas appeal, on November 23, 2022, the petitioner filed his motion to open, which, after a hearing, the court, New-son, J., denied on January 20, 2023. On March 30, 2023, the petitioner filed a petition for certification to appeal from the denial of the motion to open. The court ultimately denied the...