on briefs February 10, 2016
Amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus, brought to the
Superior Court in the judicial district of Tolland and tried
to the court, Cobb, J.; judgment denying the petition;
thereafter, the court denied the petition for certification
to appeal, and the petitioner appealed to this court.
petitioner, who had been convicted of the crime of murder,
sought a writ of habeas corpus claiming that his trial
counsel had provided ineffective assistance by failing to
call certain alibi witnesses. The habeas court credited his
trial counsel's testimony that none of the potential
alibi witnesses could have established that the petitioner
was home during the critical time frame when the murder
occurred, and the court found the testimony of the petitioner
and his brother that he was home during the time the murder
occurred to be not credible. The habeas court concluded that
counsel's decision not to call the witnesses and pursue
an alibi defense was reasonable and constituted sound trial
strategy, and rendered judgment denying 2 the petition.
Thereafter, the habeas court denied the petition for
certification to appeal, and the petitioner appealed to this
that the petitioner could not demonstrate that the habeas
court abused its discretion in denying the petition for
certification to appeal, the petitioner having failed to
demonstrate that any issue raised with regard to the
court's denial of his petition for a writ of habeas
corpus was debatable among jurists of reason, that a court
could have resolved any such issue in a different manner, or
that any question raised deserved encouragement to proceed
further; furthermore, given the habeas court's
credibility determinations, that court properly determined
that the petitioner had failed to demonstrate that
counsel's performance was deficient.
C. Bansley IV, assigned counsel, filed a brief for the
Hanna, assistant state's attorney, Stephen J. Sedensky
III, state's attorney, and Angela R. Macchiarulo, senior
assistant state's attorney, filed a brief for the
C. J., and Beach and Mullins, Js. DiPENTIMA, C. J. In this
opinion the other judges concurred.
DiPENTIMA, C. J.
Conn.App. 677] The petitioner, Julio Morquecho, appeals
following the denial of his petition for certification to
appeal from the judgment of the habeas court denying his
amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus. On appeal, the
petitioner claims that the court abused its discretion in
denying his petition for certification to appeal, that the
denial of his amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus
was improper because his trial counsel provided ineffective
assistance in failing to call certain witnesses during his
criminal trial, and [164 Conn.App. 678] that he was
prejudiced as a result. We dismiss the appeal.
habeas court set forth the following factual and procedural
history. " Although the petitioner and the
victim were never married, they had a long-term relationship
that produced two children. They moved together from Ecuador
In the spring of 2005, the victim became involved
romantically with a coworker. When the petitioner found out
about the relationship, he became angry and threatened to
kill the coworker. The victim became afraid of the petitioner
and moved out of the apartment where she had been living with
him. The petitioner stalked her and made numerous threats.
After spending some time in prison for violating a
restraining order, the petitioner was released on April 13,
2006. Shortly thereafter, the petitioner made threats to kill
The victim was murdered in the early morning hours of April
20, 2006, between 1:40 a.m. and 6 a.m., when she was found by
the police outside her home with her throat slit. The victim
had left work at 1 a.m. and drove [another coworker] home,
dropping the coworker off at 1:40 a.m.
At the time of the murder, the petitioner lived with family
in Danbury only a few minutes from the victim's home.
Police interviewed the petitioner and members of his
household as to the petitioner's whereabouts on the night
of the murder. Neither the petitioner nor his family members
could confirm that the petitioner was at ...