State v. Colon
| Citation | 272 Conn. 106,864 A.2d 666 |
| Decision Date | 28 December 2004 |
| Docket Number | No. 16446.,16446. |
| Court | Supreme Court of Connecticut |
| Parties | STATE of Connecticut v. Ivo COLON |
John Holdridge, assistant public defender, with whom was Mark Rademacher, assistant public defender, for the appellant (defendant).
Robert J. Scheinblum, assistant state's attorney, with whom were John A. Connelly, state's attorney, Maureen M. Keegan, assistant state's attorney, and, on the brief, Judith Rossi, executive assistant state's attorney, Susan C. Marks, Michael O'Hare and Harry Weller, supervisory assistant state's attorneys, James G. Clark, Timothy J. Sugrue, Rita M. Shair and Marjorie Allen Dauster, senior assistant state's attorneys, and Bruce R. Lockwood, assistant state's attorney, for the appellee (state).
BORDEN, NORCOTT, KATZ, PALMER, VERTEFEUILLE, ZARELLA and LAVERY, Js.
I. THE FACTS .................................................................. 690 II. GUILT PHASE ISSUES ......................................................... 692 A. Motion to Suppress Statements and Other Tangible Evidence ............... 692 1. Entry into the Apartment at 418 Mill Street .......................... 696 2. Illegal Seizure ...................................................... 700 B. Voir Dire of Prospective Jurors ......................................... 702 1. Granting of State's Challenges for Cause ............................. 702 a. Venireperson J.B. ................................................. 706 b. Venireperson K.L. ................................................. 708 c. Venireperson K.S. ................................................. 708 2. Restrictions on the Scope of Voir Dire ............................... 710 a. Venireperson A.M. ................................................. 711 b. Venirepersons J.C. and C.H. ....................................... 712 c. Venireperson R.L. ................................................. 713 d. Venirepersons J.J. and N.A. ....................................... 714 e. Venireperson S.P. ................................................. 717 C. Evidentiary Rulings ..................................................... 718 1. Expert Testimony Regarding the Severity of the Victim's Injuries ..... 718 2. Admissibility of the Defendant's Written Confession to the Police .... 722 3. Sustaining of Objection During Defense Counsel's Closing Argument ............................................................. 724 4. Admission of Lieutenant O'Leary's Testimony .......................... 726 5. Admission of Neighbor's Testimony .................................... 727 D. Additional Evidentiary Claims Implicating the Defendant's Right to Present a Defense ....................................................... 727 1. Testimony Regarding the Defendant's Escape from Police Custody .............................................................. 728 2. Evidence Relating to the Defendant's Mother's Felony Conviction ...... 730 3. Exclusion of Evidence of Character for Untruthfulness ................ 732 4. Exclusion of Opinion Testimony Concerning Lieutenant O'Leary's Character for Untruthfulness ......................................... 734 5. Exclusion of the Statement that Virginia Quintero's Aunt Had Given to the Police .................................................. 735 6. Exclusion of the Testimony of the Defendant's Expert Witness ......... 736 7. Exclusion of the Testimony of Officer Michael Dimaria ................ 737 8. Exclusion of Certain Testimony of Virginia Quintero's Attorney ....... 738 9. Cumulative Error ..................................................... 739 E. Jury Instructions ....................................................... 739 1. Manslaughter by Omission Instruction ................................. 740 2. Accessory Liability Instruction ...................................... 744 3. Instruction Regarding the Defendant's Attempt to Provide Medical Assistance to the Victim ............................................. 745 4. Instructions Regarding Reasonable Doubt .............................. 747 F. Prosecutorial Misconduct ................................................ 748 1. The Assertion of Contradictory Theories with Respect to the Victim's Death ....................................................... 752 2. Questioning Regarding Privileged Attorney-Client Communications ....................................................... 754 3. Prosecutorial Misconduct During Closing and Rebuttal Arguments ............................................................ 755 G. Subpoenas Duces Tecum and the State's Motion to Quash ................... 758 1. Order Compelling Defense Counsel to Turn Over State Police Reports .............................................................. 758 2. The Trial Court's Granting of the State's Motion to Quash and Its Refusal to Conduct an In Camera Inspection of Certain Documents ...... 762 3. Invitation to Overrule State v. Harris ...................... 765 4. Review of the Privileged Records for Brady Material ......... 765 H. Sufficiency of the Evidence ............................................. 767 III. PENALTY PHASE ISSUES ....................................................... 770 A. Jury Instructions Regarding the Weighing of the Aggravating and Mitigating Factors ...................................................... 770 B. The Trial Court's Acceptance of the Jury's Second, Corrected Verdict .... 772 1. Authority of the Trial Court to Recall the Jury Prior to Discharge ... 774 2. Scrivener's Error .................................................... 780 3. Double Jeopardy ...................................................... 781 4. Cruel and Unusual Punishment ......................................... 784 C. Right of Allocution ..................................................... 785 1. Right of Allocution under the Common Law, General Statutes and Rules of Practice .................................................... 788 2. Federal Constitutional Right of Allocution ........................... 792 3. State Constitutional Right of Allocution ............................. 795 D. Evidence of Prior Misconduct ............................................ 800 E. Sufficiency of the Evidence of the Existence of the Aggravating Factor .. 804 F. Mitigation Evidence ..................................................... 806 1. Evidence of the Defendant's Childhood and His Demeanor Toward a Friend ............................................................. 806 2. Shackles and Handcuffs ............................................... 808 G. Other Jury Instructions During the Penalty Phase ........................ 808 1. Instructions Regarding Juror Participation in the Weighing Process .............................................................. 809 2. Instructions Regarding § 53a-46a(h)(2) .......................... 811 3. Instructions Regarding the Requirement of Unanimity with Respect to the Finding of the Existence of Mitigating Factors ................ 812 4. Instructions Regarding the Requirement of Unanimity with Respect to the Determination of Whether the Defendant Has Proven Any Statutory Bars to the Imposition of the Death Penalty ............ 814 5. Incomprehensibility of the Trial Court's Instructions ................ 815 6. Instructions on the Standard of Reasonable Doubt ..................... 815 7. Instructions on the Need for Unanimity Regarding the Defendant's Sentence ............................................................. 815 H. The Special Verdict Form ................................................ 817 IV. JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT CLAIMS ................................................. 819 A. Expression of Impatience During the Penalty Phase ....................... 820 B. Alleged Improprieties During the Guilt Phase ............................ 821 V. MISCELLANEOUS CONSTITUTIONAL CLAIMS ........................................ 824 A. Constitutionality of the "Facts and Circumstances" Language of § 53a-46a(d) ............................................................ 824 B. Vagueness Challenge to § 53a-46a(i)(4) .................................. 828 C. The Trial Court's Denial of the Defendant's Request for a Hearing to Consider Racial Disparities in the Administration of the Death Penalty .. 828 D. Constitutionality of General Statutes (Rev. to 1997) § 53a-54b(9) .. 829 E. Constitutionality of Connecticut's Death Penalty Statutes ............... 831 The defendant, Ivo Colon, appeals from the judgment imposing a sentence of death rendered in accordance with his conviction of capital felony in violation of General Statutes (Rev. to 1997) § 53a-54b (9)1 and murder in violation of General Statutes § 53a-54a (a).2 The defendant was charged with one count of murder and one count of capital felony in connection with the death of the victim, Keriana Tellado, who was two years old at the time of her death. After a jury found the defendant guilty of all counts, a separate penalty phase hearing was conducted pursuant to General Statutes (Rev. to 1997) § 53a-46a.3 At the conclusion of the penalty phase hearing, the jury returned a special verdict finding the existence of an aggravating factor and one or more mitigating factors, and that the aggravating factor outweighed the mitigating factor or factors.4 The trial court, D'Addabbo, J., thereupon rendered judgment of guilty of capital felony and murder, merged the capital felony conviction and the murder conviction, and sentenced the defendant to death in accordance with the jury's finding of guilt and the special verdict.
On appeal to this court,5 the defendant challenges the judgment of conviction and the sentence of death. The defendant's claims on appeal that relate to the guilt phase of the trial fall into eight...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. DeMarco, No. 30152.
...evaluated on the basis of facts known at the time of entry." (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Colon, 272 Conn. 106, 142-43, 864 A.2d 666 (2004), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 848, 126 S.Ct. 102, 163 L.Ed.2d 116 (2005). "[T]he emergency doctrine is rooted in the commu......
-
State v. Daniels
...offered solely to show its effect upon the hearer, [however], is not hearsay." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Colon , 272 Conn. 106, 195, 864 A.2d 666 (2004), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 848, 126 S. Ct. 102, 163 L. Ed. 2d 116 (2005). We conclude that the statement was not hearsay b......
-
State v. Santiago, SC 17413
......295 ( Berdon , J ., dissenting in part). Subsequently, this court reiterated the holding of, or merely cited to Ross , without any further elaboration, in one-half dozen cases presenting facial challenges to the death penalty under the state constitution. See State v. Colon , 272 Conn. 106, 383, 864 A.2d 666 (2004), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 848, 126 S. Ct. 102, 163 L. Ed. 2d 116 (2005); State v. Breton , 264 Conn. 327, 418, 824 A.2d 778, cert. denied, 540 U.S. 1055, 124 S. Ct. 819, 157 L. Ed. 2d 708 (2003); State v. Reynolds , 264 Conn. 1, 236, 836 A.2d 224 ......
-
State v. Anderson, AC 35432
...conviction. And it protects against multiple prosecutions for the same offense." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Colon, 272 Conn. 106, 294, 864 A.2d 666 (2004), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 848, 126 S. Ct. 102, 163 L. Ed. 2d 116 (2005). The United States Supreme Court has held that "......
-
Prosecutorial Misconduct in Connecticut: a Review
..._ (2005); State v. Bermudez, 274 Conn. 581, 876 A.2d 1162 (2005); State v. Beaulieu, 274 Conn. 471, 876 A.2d 1155 (2005); State v. Colon, 272 Conn. 106, 864 A.2d 666 (2004); State v. Perkins, 271 Conn. 218, 856 A.2d 917 (2004); State v. Ancona, 270 Conn. 568, 854 A.2d 718 (2004); State v. S......
-
Roadmap to Connecticut Procedure
...(internal quotation marks omitted). 68. See Barlow v. Palmer, 96 Conn. App. 88, 92, 898 A.2d 835, 838 (2006). 69. See State v. Colon, 272 Conn. 106, 153 n.19, 864 A.2d 666, 703 (2004), (holding a court is "not required to review issues that have been improperly presented to [it] through an ......