LaPointe v. Comm'r of Corr.
| Citation | 307 Conn. 940,56 A.3d 948 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Connecticut |
| Decision Date | 12 December 2012 |
| Parties | Richard LAPOINTE v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION. |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Timothy J. Sugrue, senior assistant state's attorney, in support of the petition.
W. James Cousins and Paul Casteleiro, pro hac vice, in opposition.
The respondent's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 138 Conn.App. 454, 53 A.3d 257, is granted, limited to the following issue:
“Did the Appellate Court properly determine that the first habeas counsel was *949ineffective for failing to pursue a claim that the state had suppressed evidence in violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963)?”
To continue reading
Request your trial
2 cases
-
Moyher v. Comm'r of Corr.
...marks omitted.) Lapointe v. Commissioner of Correction, 138 Conn.App. 454, 474, 53 A.3d 257, cert. granted on other grounds, 307 Conn. 940, 56 A.3d 948 (2012). “Unless a [petitioner] makes both showings, it cannot be said that the conviction ... resulted from a breakdown in the adversary pr......
-
Moyher v. Comm'r of Corr.
... ... would have been different had it not been for the deficient performance.'' (Emphasis in original; internal quotation marks omitted.) Lapointe v. Commissioner of Correction, 138 Conn. App. 454, 474, 53 A.3d 257, cert. granted on other grounds, 307 Conn. 940, A.3d (2012). ''Unless a ... ...