State v. Santiago, No. 17413.
Citation | 305 Conn. 101,49 A.3d 566 |
Decision Date | 12 June 2012 |
Docket Number | No. 17413. |
Court | Supreme Court of Connecticut |
Parties | STATE of Connecticut v. Eduardo SANTIAGO. |
305 Conn. 101
49 A.3d 566
STATE of Connecticut
v.Eduardo SANTIAGO.
No. 17413.
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Argued April 27, 2011.
Decided June 12, 2012.
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Mark Rademacher, assistant public defender, for the appellant (defendant).
Marjorie Allen Dauster, senior assistant state's attorney, with whom, on the brief, were Gail P. Hardy, state's attorney, and Robert J. Scheinblum, Donna Mambrino and John F. Fahey, senior assistant state's attorneys, for the appellee (state).
ROGERS, C.J., and NORCOTT, ZARELLA, McLACHLAN, EVELEIGH, HARPER and VERTEFEUILLE, Js.
NORCOTT, J.
+-----------------+ ¦TABLE OF CONTENTS¦ +-----------------+
+------------------------------------------------+ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ +--+----------------------------------------+----¦ ¦I.¦BACKGROUND FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY ¦584 ¦ +------------------------------------------------+
+------------------------------------------+ ¦ ¦A.¦Guilt Phase ¦584¦ +--+--+--------------------------------+---¦ ¦ ¦B.¦Penalty Phase ¦589¦ +--+--+--------------------------------+---¦ ¦ ¦C.¦Outline of Claims on Appeal ¦597¦ +------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ +----+---------------------------------------------------------------+-------¦ ¦II. ¦DID PROBABLE CAUSE EXIST FOR THE DEFENDANT'S ARREST ON CAPITAL ¦600 ¦ ¦ ¦FELONY CHARGES UNDER § 53a–54b (2)? ¦ ¦ +----+---------------------------------------------------------------+-------¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ +----+---------------------------------------------------------------+-------¦ ¦III.¦SUPPRESSION ISSUES ¦602 ¦ +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦ ¦A. ¦Additional Relevant Facts and Procedural History ¦603 ¦ +----+----+-----------------------------------------------------------+------¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Should the Trial Court Have Suppressed the Defendant's ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦B. ¦Statement Made in the Police Cruiser about the Location of ¦606 ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦the Rifle? ¦ ¦ +----+----+-----------------------------------------------------------+------¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Did the Trial Court Improperly Deny the ny the Defendant's ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦C. ¦Motion to Suppress His Statement Made at the Police ¦609 ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Station? ¦ ¦ +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦ ¦ ¦1. ¦Was the Defendant's Miranda Waiver Voluntary? ¦609 ¦ +----+----+---+-------------------------------------------------------+------¦ ¦ ¦ ¦2. ¦Did the Police Violate the Defendant's Rights under ¦611 ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Stoddard? ¦ ¦ +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦ ¦D. ¦Did the Police Illegally Seize the Murder Weapon during the¦615 ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Protective Sweep of the Defendant's Apartment? ¦ ¦ +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ +----+---------------------------------------------------------------+-------¦ ¦IV. ¦JURY SELECTION CLAIMS ¦617 ¦ +----+---------------------------------------------------------------+-------¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ +----+---------------------------------------------------------------+-------¦ ¦ ¦WAS THERE SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE JURY'S GENERAL ¦ ¦ ¦V. ¦VERDICT FINDING THE DEFENDANT GUILTY OF CAPITAL FELONY IN ¦619 ¦ ¦ ¦VIOLATION OF § 53a–54b (2) UNDER A THEORY OF ACCESSORIAL ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦LIABILITY PURSUANT TO § 53a–8? ¦ ¦ +----+---------------------------------------------------------------+-------¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ +----+---------------------------------------------------------------+-------¦ ¦VI. ¦CLAIMS ARISING FROM THE GUILT PHASE JURY INSTRUCTIONS ¦624 ¦ +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦ ¦A. ¦Did the Trial Court Properly Instruct the Jury about the ¦625 ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Elements of Capital Felony under §§ 53a–54b (2) and 53a–8? ¦ ¦ +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Was a Separate Agreement by Tyrell to Murder the Victim¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦1. ¦for Pecuniary Gain Necessary for the Defendant to Be ¦627 ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Held Accessorily Liable under §§ 53a–54b (2) and 53a–8?¦ ¦ +----+----+---+-------------------------------------------------------+------¦ ¦ ¦ ¦2. ¦Did the Trial Court Improperly Fail to Define the Term ¦628 ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦“Hired” under § 53a–54b (2)? ¦ ¦ +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦ ¦ ¦Does the Concededly Improper Instruction on Conspiracy to ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦B. ¦Commit Burglary in Violation of §§ 53a–48 and 53a–101 (a) ¦630 ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦(2) Require Reversal of the Defendant's Conviction of That ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Charge? ¦ ¦ +----+----+-----------------------------------------------------------+------¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Did the Trial Court Improperly Instruct the Jury that It ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦C. ¦Could Not Draw an Adverse Inference from the State's ¦632 ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Failure to Produce Certain Cell Phone Records? ¦ ¦ +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ +----+---------------------------------------------------------------+-------¦ ¦VII.¦DID THE TRIAL COURT IMPROPERLY REFUSE TO DISCLOSE TO THE ¦636 ¦ ¦ ¦DEFENDANT THE ENTIRE DEPARTMENT FILE PERTAINING TO HIS FAMILY? ¦ ¦ +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦ ¦A. ¦Additional Relevant Facts and Procedural History¦639 ¦ +---+---+------------------------------------------------+------¦ ¦ ¦B. ¦Governing Law ¦641 ¦ +---------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦ ¦ ¦1. ¦Constitutional Bases for In Camera Review ¦642 ¦ +----+----+---+-------------------------------------------------------+------¦ ¦ ¦ ¦2. ¦In Camera Review as Applied in Death Penalty Cases ¦645 ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦under the Due Process Clause ¦ ¦ +----+----+---+-------------------------------------------------------+------¦ ¦ ¦ ¦3. ¦The Import of the ABA Guidelines to In Camera Review of¦648 ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Privileged Records ¦ ¦ +----+----+---+-------------------------------------------------------+------¦ ¦ ¦ ¦4. ¦Appellate Review of the Trial Court's In Camera ¦651 ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Determination ¦ ¦ +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ +-----+---------------------------------------------------------------+------¦ ¦ ¦WAS THE JURY'S SENTENCING VERDICT ARBITRARY, NOT SUPPORTED BY ¦ ¦ ¦VIII.¦SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE OR OTHERWISE A PRODUCT OF “PASSION, ¦654 ¦ ¦ ¦PREJUDICE OR OTHER ARBITRARY FACTOR?” ¦ ¦ +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦ ¦A. ¦Was There Sufficient Evidence to Support Proof of the Sole ¦655 ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Aggravating Factor? ¦ ¦ +----+----+-----------------------------------------------------------+------¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Could the Jury Reasonably Have Found That the Sole ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦B. ¦Aggravating Factor Outweighed the Defendant's Mitigating ¦656 ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Evidence? ¦ ¦ +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ +----+---------------------------------------------------------------+-------¦ ¦ ¦DOES THE FACT THAT THE SOLE AGGRAVATING FACTOR FOUND BY THE ¦ ¦ ¦IX. ¦JURY IS IDENTICAL TO AN ELEMENT OF THE UNDERLYING CAPITAL CRIME¦658...
To continue reading
Request your trialSubscribers can access the reported version of this case.
You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.
Why Sign-up to vLex?
-
Over 100 Countries
Search over 120 million documents from over 100 countries including primary and secondary collections of legislation, case law, regulations, practical law, news, forms and contracts, books, journals, and more.
-
Thousands of Data Sources
Updated daily, vLex brings together legal information from over 750 publishing partners, providing access to over 2,500 legal and news sources from the world’s leading publishers.
-
Find What You Need, Quickly
Advanced A.I. technology developed exclusively by vLex editorially enriches legal information to make it accessible, with instant translation into 14 languages for enhanced discoverability and comparative research.
-
Over 2 million registered users
Founded over 20 years ago, vLex provides a first-class and comprehensive service for lawyers, law firms, government departments, and law schools around the world.
Subscribers are able to see a list of all the cited cases and legislation of a document.
You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.
Why Sign-up to vLex?
-
Over 100 Countries
Search over 120 million documents from over 100 countries including primary and secondary collections of legislation, case law, regulations, practical law, news, forms and contracts, books, journals, and more.
-
Thousands of Data Sources
Updated daily, vLex brings together legal information from over 750 publishing partners, providing access to over 2,500 legal and news sources from the world’s leading publishers.
-
Find What You Need, Quickly
Advanced A.I. technology developed exclusively by vLex editorially enriches legal information to make it accessible, with instant translation into 14 languages for enhanced discoverability and comparative research.
-
Over 2 million registered users
Founded over 20 years ago, vLex provides a first-class and comprehensive service for lawyers, law firms, government departments, and law schools around the world.
Subscribers are able to see a list of all the documents that have cited the case.
You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.
Why Sign-up to vLex?
-
Over 100 Countries
Search over 120 million documents from over 100 countries including primary and secondary collections of legislation, case law, regulations, practical law, news, forms and contracts, books, journals, and more.
-
Thousands of Data Sources
Updated daily, vLex brings together legal information from over 750 publishing partners, providing access to over 2,500 legal and news sources from the world’s leading publishers.
-
Find What You Need, Quickly
Advanced A.I. technology developed exclusively by vLex editorially enriches legal information to make it accessible, with instant translation into 14 languages for enhanced discoverability and comparative research.
-
Over 2 million registered users
Founded over 20 years ago, vLex provides a first-class and comprehensive service for lawyers, law firms, government departments, and law schools around the world.
Subscribers are able to see the revised versions of legislation with amendments.
You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.
Why Sign-up to vLex?
-
Over 100 Countries
Search over 120 million documents from over 100 countries including primary and secondary collections of legislation, case law, regulations, practical law, news, forms and contracts, books, journals, and more.
-
Thousands of Data Sources
Updated daily, vLex brings together legal information from over 750 publishing partners, providing access to over 2,500 legal and news sources from the world’s leading publishers.
-
Find What You Need, Quickly
Advanced A.I. technology developed exclusively by vLex editorially enriches legal information to make it accessible, with instant translation into 14 languages for enhanced discoverability and comparative research.
-
Over 2 million registered users
Founded over 20 years ago, vLex provides a first-class and comprehensive service for lawyers, law firms, government departments, and law schools around the world.
Subscribers are able to see any amendments made to the case.
You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.
Why Sign-up to vLex?
-
Over 100 Countries
Search over 120 million documents from over 100 countries including primary and secondary collections of legislation, case law, regulations, practical law, news, forms and contracts, books, journals, and more.
-
Thousands of Data Sources
Updated daily, vLex brings together legal information from over 750 publishing partners, providing access to over 2,500 legal and news sources from the world’s leading publishers.
-
Find What You Need, Quickly
Advanced A.I. technology developed exclusively by vLex editorially enriches legal information to make it accessible, with instant translation into 14 languages for enhanced discoverability and comparative research.
-
Over 2 million registered users
Founded over 20 years ago, vLex provides a first-class and comprehensive service for lawyers, law firms, government departments, and law schools around the world.
Subscribers are able to see a visualisation of a case and its relationships to other cases. An alternative to lists of cases, the Precedent Map makes it easier to establish which ones may be of most relevance to your research and prioritise further reading. You also get a useful overview of how the case was received.
Why Sign-up to vLex?
-
Over 100 Countries
Search over 120 million documents from over 100 countries including primary and secondary collections of legislation, case law, regulations, practical law, news, forms and contracts, books, journals, and more.
-
Thousands of Data Sources
Updated daily, vLex brings together legal information from over 750 publishing partners, providing access to over 2,500 legal and news sources from the world’s leading publishers.
-
Find What You Need, Quickly
Advanced A.I. technology developed exclusively by vLex editorially enriches legal information to make it accessible, with instant translation into 14 languages for enhanced discoverability and comparative research.
-
Over 2 million registered users
Founded over 20 years ago, vLex provides a first-class and comprehensive service for lawyers, law firms, government departments, and law schools around the world.
Subscribers are able to see the list of results connected to your document through the topics and citations Vincent found.
You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.
Why Sign-up to vLex?
-
Over 100 Countries
Search over 120 million documents from over 100 countries including primary and secondary collections of legislation, case law, regulations, practical law, news, forms and contracts, books, journals, and more.
-
Thousands of Data Sources
Updated daily, vLex brings together legal information from over 750 publishing partners, providing access to over 2,500 legal and news sources from the world’s leading publishers.
-
Find What You Need, Quickly
Advanced A.I. technology developed exclusively by vLex editorially enriches legal information to make it accessible, with instant translation into 14 languages for enhanced discoverability and comparative research.
-
Over 2 million registered users
Founded over 20 years ago, vLex provides a first-class and comprehensive service for lawyers, law firms, government departments, and law schools around the world.
-
State v. Santiago
- United States
- Connecticut Supreme Court
- August 25, 2015
-
State v. Santiago, SC 17413
- United States
- Connecticut Supreme Court
- August 25, 2015
-
State v. Anderson, AC 35432
- United States
- Connecticut Court of Appeals
- June 30, 2015
-
State v. Santiago
- United States
- Connecticut Supreme Court
- August 25, 2015