Argued
May 30, 2017
Michael W. Brown, for the appellant (petitioner).
Timothy J. Sugrue, assistant state's attorney, with whom,
on the brief, were Patrick J. Griffin, state's attorney,
and Rebecca A. Barry, assistant state's attorney, for the
appellee (respondent).
Sheldon, Mullins and Sullivan, Js.
Syllabus
The
petitioner sought a writ of habeas corpus, claiming, inter
alia, that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance
by failing to challenge the state's medical evidence by
consulting and calling as a witness a medical expert with
experience evaluating medical evidence in child sexual abuse
cases to rebut certain testimony offered by the state's
expert witness, M. The habeas court rendered judgment denying
the petition, from which the petitioner, on the granting of
certification, appealed to this court.
Held:
2. The
petitioner could not prevail on his claim that the habeas
court improperly determined that he had failed to prove that
his trial counsel performed deficiently by failing to present
the testimony of a neurosurgeon who had performed back
surgery on the petitioner to establish that the petitioner
was incapable of physically or sexually abusing the victim,
the petitioner having failed to rebut the presumption that
trial counsel's decision not to pursue such a theory by
calling that witness was based on reasonable professional
judgment; that court found that trial counsel had discussed
the potential defense of physical incapability with the
petitioner but reasonably could have concluded that it was
not an adequate defense to the charged crimes, that such a
defense would not have been helpful because the jury was not
likely to believe it, and that evidence regarding the
petitioner's surgery and subsequent recovery would not
have been helpful to the theory of defense at trial, which
was that the victim had fabricated the allegations to avoid
being returned to her mother's care.
Procedural
History
Amended
petition for a writ of habeas corpus, brought to the Superior
Court in the judicial district of Tolland and tried to the
court, Oliver, J.; judgment denying the petition,
from which the petitioner, on the granting of certification,
appealed to this court. Affirmed.
OPINION
MULLINS, J.
The
petitioner, Jeffrey Williams, appeals from the judgment of
the habeas court denying his petition for a writ of habeas
corpus. He claims that the court improperly concluded that he
failed to prove that his trial attorney provided ineffective
assistance of counsel by failing (1) to challenge the
state's medical evidence by consulting and calling as a
witness a medical expert with experience evaluating medical
evidence in child sexual abuse cases, and (2) to present the
testimony of John Strugar, a neurosurgeon, who performed back
surgery on the petitioner in August, 1999. We affirm the
judgment of the habeas court.
This
court's decision in the petitioner's direct appeal
sets forth the following relevant facts, which the jury in
the petitioner's criminal trial reasonably could have
found, and procedural history. ‘‘Between the
spring of 1997 and mid-October, 1999, the
victim[1] and her three younger sisters lived with
their mother, who was the [petitioner's] girlfriend, her
uncle and the [petitioner] at various residences in the city
of New Haven. The victim was approximately eight years old
when the [petitioner] began to abuse her. The [petitioner]
beat her about once a week for a variety of reasons. In
November, 1997, the [petitioner] knocked the victim to the
floor, causing a spiral fracture of her left humerus. The
victim was taken to a hospital, but her mother instructed her
and her sisters to attribute the injury to the victim's
having fallen off her bed. On another occasion, the
[petitioner] banged the victim's head on a sink, breaking
one of her teeth. When the victim told her mother of the
broken tooth, her mother instructed her to go outside and
play. The [petitioner] struck the victim with a wooden paddle
and on one occasion gave her a black eye. The victim's
mother put makeup on the bruise to cover it. The victim's
teacher, however, noticed the makeup and bruise. At another
time, the school personnel discovered a hickey on the
victim's neck. The victim had told her mother that the
[petitioner] had given her the hickey. The [petitioner]
convinced her mother that someone else had given the victim a
hickey and then beat the victim.
‘‘Sometime
between August and October, 1999, the [petitioner] placed the
victim in a situation that was likely to injure her health.
When the victim did not comply with the [petitioner's]
instructions, he made her put her head out a window and then
he poured water over her head. He made her stay there until
it was time to go to school.
‘‘At
night, the [petitioner] would awaken the victim and take her
to his room where he told her to rub his back.[2] Initially, the
[petitioner] lay face down but would turn over and instruct
the victim to rub his lower body. The [petitioner] took the
victim's hand and placed it on his penis, at first
outside of his boxer shorts and then inside. The
[petitioner's] sexual abuse progressed beyond back-rubs
and having the victim touch his penis. The [petitioner] began
to grope the victim's vagina, buttocks, thighs and
undeveloped chest. On three or four occasions, the
[petitioner] forced his penis into the victim's
vagina.[3] If the victim asked the [petitioner] to
stop, he would tell her not to tell him what to do. The
victim bled after the first and second rapes and told her
mother, who told her she was having her menstrual period.
Although the victim reported the abuse to her grandfather, he
...