State v. Flanagan
Decision Date | 15 September 2009 |
Docket Number | No. 17990.,17990. |
Citation | 978 A.2d 64,293 Conn. 406 |
Court | Connecticut Supreme Court |
Parties | STATE of Connecticut v. Maurice FLANAGAN. |
Richard W. Callahan, special public defender, for the appellant (defendant).
Nancy L. Chupak, senior assistant state's attorney, with whom, on the brief, were Scott J. Murphy' state's attorney, Herbert E. Carlson, Jr., supervisory assistant state's attorney, and Kevin Murphy, senior assistant state's attorney, for the appellee (state).
NORCOTT, KATZ, PALMER, ZARELLA and PITTMAN, Js.
The defendant, Maurice Flanagan, appeals, following our grant of his petition for certification,1 from the judgment of the Appellate Court affirming the trial court's judgment of conviction, rendered after a jury trial, of conspiracy to commit assault in the first degree in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a-59(a)(1) and 53a-48(a). State v. Flanagan, 102 Conn.App. 105, 106-107, 925 A.2d 385 (2007) (en banc) (Flanagan II). On appeal, the defendant claims: (1) that the Appellate Court improperly concluded that he had not clearly and unequivocally invoked his right to self-representation under the sixth amendment2 to the United States constitution;3 and (2) in response to an alternate ground for affirmance proffered by the state, that the trial court improperly applied an "exceptional circumstances" test in ruling on the timeliness of his request to represent himself. We agree with both of the defendant's claims and, accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the Appellate Court.
The record and the Appellate Court decision reveal the following relevant facts and procedural history. In connection with a gang related drive-by shooting in New Britain in 1994, the state charged the defendant with two counts of murder in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a-54a(a) and 53a-8, two counts of criminal attempt to commit murder in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a-54a(a), 53a-8 and 53a-49(a)(2), one count of conspiracy to commit murder in violation of §§ 53a-54a(a) and 53a-48(a), and one count of conspiracy to commit assault in the first degree in violation of §§ 53a-59(a)(1) and 53a-48(a). "At trial, the defendant was represented by a special public defender. On several occasions during the trial, the defendant expressed his dissatisfaction with his attorney's performance. Prior to jury selection, the defendant filed a motion to dismiss his attorney. The defendant claimed that his attorney was not investigating the case adequately. The defendant's attorney acknowledged the existence of problems with investigating matters related to the case and made representations to the court concerning his investigative efforts. The court thereafter denied the defendant's motion, noting that the defendant's attorney had been a `great advocate' for the defendant.
" The defendant replied that he viewed his attorney's strategy as being `too narrow' and that he believed that, if the defense called witnesses to testify, the jury would be able to evaluate the case `from a different angle.' The defendant expressed his view that for the defense not to present any evidence would afford the jury only `one option,' which would lead to a finding of guilt. The defendant analogized his attorney's strategy to one used in the game of chess and opined that it was inappropriate. The defendant also recalled that, in a prior trial, the jury found him guilty after the attorney representing him in that case did not present any evidence in his defense.
State v. Flanagan, supra, 102 Conn.App. at 107-11, 925 A.2d 385. The jury subsequently returned a verdict finding the defendant guilty of conspiracy to commit assault in the first degree in violation of §§ 53a-59(a)(1) and 53a-48(a), and not guilty of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial- State v. Bush
- State v. Braswell
-
State v. Wang
... ... Flanagan, 293 Conn. 406, 418, 978 A.2d 64 2009). Whereas the right of self-representation directly conflicts with the right to counsel pursuant to the sixth ... ...
- State v. Jordan
-
A Survey of Criminal Law Opinions
...104 A.3d 466 (2014)). [334] Id. at 318 (quoting United States v. Farias, 618 F.3d 1049, 1053 (9th Cir. 2010)). [335] State v. Flanagan, 293 Conn. 406, 431, 978 A.2d 64 (2009). [336] Id. at 431. [337] Bush, 325 Conn. at 320. [338] Id. at 322. [339] Id. at 323-24. [340] 324 Conn. 548, 153 A.3......
-
A Servey of Criminal Law Opinion
...104 A.3d 466 (2014)). [334] Id. at 318 (quoting United States v. Farias, 618 F.3d 1049, 1053 (9th Cir. 2010)). [335] State v. Flanagan, 293 Conn. 406, 431, 978 A.2d 64 (2009). [336] Id. at 431. [337] Bush, 325 Conn, at 320. [338] Id. at 322. [339] Id. at 323-24. [340] 324 Conn. 548, 153 A.3......
-
2009 Appellate Review
...620 (2009). 23. 292 Conn. 483, 973 A.2d 627 (2009). 24. 292 Conn. 558, 973 A.2d 1254 (2009). 25. 290 Conn. 386, 963 A.2d 956 (2009). 26. 293 Conn. 406, 978 A.2d 64 (2009). 27. 293 Conn. 489, 978 A.2d 502 (2009). 28. 291 Conn. 642, 969 A.2d 750 (2009). 29. 291 Conn. 574, 969 A.2d 710 (2009) ......