Elsey v. Comm'r of Correction
Decision Date | 18 January 2011 |
Docket Number | No. 31132.,31132. |
Citation | 126 Conn.App. 144,10 A.3d 578 |
Court | Connecticut Court of Appeals |
Parties | Terance ELSEY v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION. |
Jodi Zils Gagne, special public defender, for the appellant (petitioner).
Tamara A. Grosso, special deputy assistant state's attorney, with whom were Michael J. Proto, assistant state's attorney,and, on the brief, Scott J. Murphy, state's attorney, for the appellee (respondent).
HARPER, ROBINSON and ALVORD, Js.
The petitioner, Terance Elsey, appeals from the judgment of the habeas court denying his amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The petitioner claims that the habeas court improperly concluded (1) that he failed to prove that the state suppressed exculpatory evidence at his criminal trial in violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 87, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), and (2) that he failed to prove ineffective assistance of his trial counsel. We affirm the judgment of the habeas court.
The decision of this court in the petitioner's direct appeal sets forth the following facts underlying the petitioner's conviction. "On January 12, 2000, three people were residing in a house in New Britain. At about 12:30 a.m., the occupants heard numerous gunshots. Several bullets entered the house through the windows and the walls. Some of the bullets entered a living room, where one of the victims, a young man, was watching television. The young man dove to the floor and told the other victims to call the police. One of the other victims called the New Britain police.
State v. Elsey, 81 Conn.App. 738, 740-43, 841 A.2d 714, cert. denied, 269 Conn. 901, 852 A.2d 733 (2004).
At the petitioner's trial, Wayne Stephens, the son of one of the victims, testified that he had lent his car to a friend who had used the car to rob Hughes, the petitioner's cousin. Seeid., at 743, 841 A.2d 714. Stephens testified that the next day, the petitioner's brother told him, "I can't get you, so I know where your mom lives [at] and I'm going there tonight." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id.
The petitioner was convicted of "arson in the first degree as an accessory in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a-8 and 53a-111(a)(1), conspiracy to commit arson in the first degree in violation ofGeneral Statutes §§ 53a-48 and 53a-111 (a)(1), two counts of attempt to commit assault in the first degree in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a-49 and 53a-59 (a)(1) and (4), two counts of conspiracy to commit assault in the first degree in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a-48 and 53a-59 (a)(1) and (4), and three counts of reckless endangerment in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-63." Id., at 739, 841 A.2d 714. The petitioner was sentenced to a total effective term of thirty years imprisonment, suspended after fifteen years, with five years of probation. On direct appeal, this court affirmed the petitioner's convictions, but held that the petitioner's separate sentences for the three conspiracy counts violated the petitioner's right to be free of double jeopardy. Id., at 752, 841 A.2d 714. This court ordered that the three conspiracy counts be combined and two of the sentences vacated. Id. The petitioner's subsequent petition for certification to appeal to our Supreme Court was denied. State v. Elsey, 269 Conn. 901, 852 A.2d 733 (2004).
The petitioner filed his original petition for habeas corpus on February 7, 2005, and subsequently filed the operative third amended petition for habeas corpus on September 2, 2008. Although the petitioner presented a multitude of grounds in support of his petition, we need only address those grounds that are relevant to this appeal. First, the petitioner claimed that the state violated his right to due process by failing to disclose the fact that Stephens had received a sentence modification shortly before testifying for the state. Additionally, the petitioner alleged that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance for several reasons relating to his investigation and examination of Stephens as well as for the manner with which he responded to the state's presentation of evidence relating to a gun and a bullet. After conducting a hearing, the habeas court found that the petitioner's...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Donald v. Comm'r of Corr.
...considered this undisclosed impeachment evidence." (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Elsey v. Commissioner of Correction , 126 Conn. App. 144, 160, 10 A.3d 578, cert. denied, 300 Conn. 922, 14 A.3d 1007 (2011).IIThe petitioner's final claim on appeal is that the habeas ......
-
Moye v. Comm'r of Corr.
...and speculation are not enough to support a showing of prejudice.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Elsey v. Commissioner of Correction, 126 Conn.App. 144, 166, 10 A.3d 578, cert. denied, 300 Conn. 922, 14 A.3d 1007 (2011). Accordingly, the habeas court properly determined that the petit......
-
Woodward v. State
...McMillan v. State, [Ms. CR-14-0935, August 11, 2017] ___ So. 3d ___, ___ (Ala. Crim. App. 2017) (quoting Elsey v. Commissioner of Corr., 126 Conn.App. 144, 166, 10 A.3d 578, 593 (2011)) (additional citations omitted). Moreover, "[a] bare allegation that prejudice occurred without specific f......
-
McMillan v. State
...of counsel, ‘[m]ere conjecture and speculation are not enough to support a showing of prejudice.’ " Elsey v. Commissioner of Corr., 126 Conn.App. 144, 166, 10 A.3d 578, 593 (2011) (citation omitted). This circuit court properly dismissed this claim because no material issue of law or fact e......