September 25, 2018
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.
E. Mortimer, assigned counsel, for the appellant
F. Currie-Zeffiro, assistant state's attorney, with whom,
on the brief, were Maureen Platt, state's attorney, and
Eva B. Lenczewski, supervisory assistant state's
attorney, for the appellee (respondent).
Lavine, Sheldon and Bishop, Js.
petitioner, Alexis Santos, appeals from the judgment of the
habeas court denying his petition for a writ of habeas
corpus. On appeal, the petitioner claims that the habeas
court improperly concluded that his trial counsel did not
provide ineffective assistance by failing to retain an expert
witness to assist in his defense and by failing to present
the testimony of certain fact witnesses. We affirm the
judgment of the habeas court.
following procedural history, as set forth by the habeas
court, is relevant to this appeal. ‘‘On September
24, 2012, in the Waterbury judicial district, in the matter
of State v. Santos, Docket No.
CR-11-401131, following a jury trial, the petitioner was
convicted of four counts of sexual assault in the first
degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-70 (a)
(2), four counts of risk of injury to a child in violation of
General Statutes § 53-21 (a) (2) and one count of risk
of injury to a child in violation of § 53-21 (a) (1). In
docket number CR-11-402391, the petitioner was convicted of
one count of sexual assault in the first degree, one count of
risk of injury to a child in violation of § 53-21 (a)
(2), one count of risk of injury to a child in violation of
§ 53-21 (a) (1) and one count of sexual assault in the
fourth degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-73a
(a) (1) (A). On November 30, 2012, the trial court,
Crawford, J., sentenced the petitioner to a total
effective term of twenty years of incarceration followed by
twenty years of special parole.'' This court affirmed
the petitioner's conviction. See State v.
Santos, 148 Conn.App. 907, 86 A.3d 1099, cert.
denied, 311 Conn. 944, 89 A.3d 351 (2014).
petitioner thereafter initiated this matter by the filing of
his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. In his operative
petition, he claimed that his trial counsel, Tashun
Bowden-Lewis, rendered ineffective assistance. Following an
evidentiary hearing, the habeas court rejected the
petitioner's claims by way of a memorandum of decision
filed April 5, 2017. The habeas court concluded that the
petitioner had failed to prove that Bowden-Lewis'
representation of him was deficient or that he was prejudiced
by any aspect of her allegedly deficient performance, and
thus denied his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. On
April 21, 2017, the habeas court granted the petitioner's
petition for certification to appeal.
appeal, the petitioner claims that the habeas court erred in
rejecting his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. We
have examined the record on appeal, the briefs and arguments
of the parties, and conclude that the judgment of the habeas
court should be affirmed. Because the habeas court thoroughly
addressed the arguments raised in this appeal, we adopt its
well reasoned decision as a statement of the facts and the
applicable law on the issues. See Santos v.
Commissioner of Correction, Superior Court, judicial
district of Tolland, Docket No. CV-14-4005961-S, (April 5,
2017) (reprinted at 186 Conn.App. 110, A.3d). Any further
discussion by this court would serve no useful purpose. See,
e.g., Woodruff v. Hemingway, 297 Conn. 317,
321, 2 A.3d 857 (2010); Brander v.
Stoddard, 173 Conn.App. 730, 732, 164 A.3d 889,
cert. denied, 327 Conn. 928, 171 A.3d 456 (2017).
judgment is affirmed.
SANTOS V. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION[*]
Court, Judicial District of Tolland File No. CV-14-4005961-S
filed April 5, 2017
of decision after completed habeas corpus trial to court.
Judgment for respondent.
E. Mortimer, assigned counsel, for the petitioner.
Lenczewski, supervisory assistant state's attorney, for
petitioner, Alexis Santos, brings this petition for a writ of
habeas corpus, claiming that his criminal defense attorney
provided him ineffective assistance in violation of the state
and federal constitutions, and seeking to have his
convictions vacated. Specifically, the petitioner claims, in
his amended petition filed July 22, 2016, that his right to
effective legal representation was denied in that his
counsel, Attorney Tashun Bowden-Lewis, committed a number of
errors at trial.
petitioner claims that his right to effective legal
representation at trial was denied in that his underlying
trial counsel was constitutionally deficientin the following
a. She did not retain, consult with and present the testimony
ofa mental health professional with an expertise in
investigating and evaluating child sexual abuse allegations
in order to:
1. Call into question the reliability of victim M.H.'s
2. Call into question the reliability of victim Y.H.'s
3. Rebut the testimony of prosecution witness Theresa
Montelli concerning ‘‘common characteristics and
behaviors'' of sexually abused children;
4. Rebut the testimony of prosecution expert witness Theresa
Montelli concerning the statistical probabilities of children
5. Provide a consultation source to counsel so as to avoid
eliciting damaging information on cross-examination
6. Provide an alternative innocent explanation for false
7. Rebut the credibility of the forensic interviewer re:
failing to explore alternative innocent explanations.
b. She failed to adequately cross-examine, impeach and
otherwise challenge the testimony of the victim M.H.,
concerning her motive, interest and bias against the
c. She failed to adequately object to the introduction of
M.H.'s forensic interview based on hearsay grounds;
d. She failed to adequately challenge the testimony of Y.H.
concerning her motive, interest and bias ...