Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Artiaco v. Commissioner of Correction

Court of Appeals of Connecticut

March 13, 2018

WILLIAM ALBERT ARTIACO
v.
COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION

          Argued January 10, 2018

         Procedural History

         Amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus, brought to the Superior Court in the judicial district of Tolland, where the court, Sferrazza, J., rendered judgment denying the petition; thereafter, the court denied the petition for certification to appeal, and the petitioner appealed to this court. Appeal dismissed.

          Robert J. McKay, assigned counsel, for the appellant (petitioner).

          Michael J. Proto, assistant state's attorney, with whom, on the brief, was Anne F. Mahoney, state's attorney, for the appellee (respondent).

          Lavine, Sheldon and Bishop, Js.

          OPINION

          SHELDON, J.

         The petitioner, William Albert Artiaco, appeals following the denial of his petition for certification to appeal from the judgment of the habeas court denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The petitioner claims that the habeas court erred in concluding that he was not denied the effective assistance of trial counsel and denying his petition for certification to appeal.[1] Because the petitioner has failed to adequately brief his claims of error, we decline to review them, and thus dismiss the petitioner's appeal.

         The habeas court set forth the following relevant procedural history. ‘‘The petitioner . . . seeks habeas corpus relief from a total, effective sentence of imprisonment for twenty years and ten years special parole, imposed following a jury trial at which the petitioner was convicted of sexual assault first degree and risk of injury to a minor in a file denoted as CR-09-0151382-0; and sexual assault first degree and risk of injury to a [child] in a second file denoted CR-09-0138933-T. The latter case had been transferred to the Windham Judicial District from the Hartford Judicial District for companionized adjudication. On June 21, 2013, the Appellate Court dismissed the appeal from the judgments of conviction because no appellate brief was filed in accordance with that court's orders, State v. Artiaco, AC 34962.

         ‘‘The amended petition sets forth . . . a claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel[2] . . . .

         ‘‘At his criminal trial, Attorney Christopher Grotz represented the petitioner, and the petitioner specifies twenty ways in which trial counsel was ineffective, to wit:

‘‘a. Trial counsel failed to sufficiently prepare for the petitioner's jury trial;
‘‘b. Trial counsel agreed to represent the petitioner knowing that he lacked experience in litigating sexual assault cases;
‘‘c. Trial counsel failed to secure, subpoena or otherwise arrange to have witnesses known to the trial counsel available for trial to provide exculpatory testimony on behalf of the petitioner who would have undermined the credibility of the state's witnesses and who would have provided testimony which would ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.