September 17, 2018
charging the defendant with the crimes of murder, felony
murder, attempt to commit robbery in the first degree,
criminal possession of a firearm;, and carrying a pistol
without a permit, brought to the Superior Court in the
judicial district of Hartford; thereafter, the defendant
elected a court trial as to the charge of criminal possession
of a firearm; subsequently, the state entered a nolle
persequi as to that charge; thereafter, the remaining charges
were tried to the jury before Dewey, J.; verdict and
judgment of guilty of murder and carrying a pistol without a
permit, from which the defendant appealed. Affirmed.
Stephanie L. Evans, for the appellant (defendant).
Jennifer F. Miller, assistant state's attorney, with
whom, on the brief, were Gail P. Hardy, state's attorney,
and Chris A. Pelosi, senior assistant state's attorney,
for the appellee (state).
DiPentima, C. J., and Elgo and Norcott, Js.
defendant, Cleveland Brown, appeals from the judgment of
conviction, rendered after a jury trial, of murder in
violation of General Statutes § 53a-54a (a) and carrying
a pistol without permit in violation of General Statutes
§ 29-35 (a). On appeal he claims that the trial court
failed to ensure that the trial transcript reflected each
individual juror's oral concurrence with the jury
verdict. Specifically, the defendant argues that Practice
Book § 42-29, which provides that ‘‘the
verdict shall be . . . announced by the jury in open court,
'' requires that all jurors orally concur with the
verdict, and that the trial court's failure to ensure
that this procedure was transcribed on the record violated
his state and federal constitutional due process rights. In
response, the state argues that the record is inadequate for
review. We agree with the state that we have an inadequate
record for review in the present case. Accordingly, we
affirm the judgment of the trial court.
following facts and procedural history are relevant to the
defendant's appeal. The defendant was tried before a jury
on a four count information charging him with murder in
violation of § 53a-54a (a), felony murder in violation
of General Statutes § 53a-54c, attempt to commit robbery
in the first degree in violation of General Statutes
§§ 53a-49 (a) (2) and 53a-134 (a), and carrying a
pistol without a permit in violation of § 29-35
The jury initially announced its verdict in the absence of
the court monitor and, therefore, it was not transcribed.
Once the court monitor was present, the court instructed the
jury foreperson to reiterate the verdict. The following
colloquy took place:
‘‘The Court: Are you ready. All right. I'm
going to note for the record that the verdict was already
announced by the jurors. Unfortunately, the monitor was not
here-was not called. So for the record all of the juror's
names were called out. All of the jurors indicated they are
present. The only portion that you're going to reread is
the actual verdict itself the questions. All right. If the
foreperson could please stand. Thank you. All right. Do it
‘‘The Clerk: Madam Foreperson, has the jury
reached a verdict in the case of the state of Connecticut
versus Cleveland Brown, docket number HHD-CR14-0676472T,
please answer yes or no.
‘‘Madam Foreperson: Yes.
‘‘The Clerk: Will defendant, Cleveland Brown,
please rise and remain standing.
‘‘Madam Foreperson, in the first count charging
the defendant with the crime of murder in violation of
Connecticut General Statutes § 53a-54a (a), do you ...