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.

Abrams v. Commissioner of Correction

Appellate Court of Connecticut

September 17, 2019

David A. ABRAMS
v.
COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION

         Argued May 29, 2019

Page 730

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 731

         Superior Court, Judicial District of Tolland, Oliver, J.

         Affirmed.

          Judie Marshall, with whom, on the brief, was Walter C. Bansley IV, New Haven, for the appellant (petitioner).

         Sarah Hanna, assistant state’s attorney, with whom, on the brief, were Stephen J. Sedensky, state’s attorney, and Jo Anne Sulik, supervisory assistant state’s attorney, for the appellee (respondent).

         Keller, Bright and Devlin, Js.

          OPINION

         DEVLIN, J.

         [192 Conn.App. 851] The petitioner, David A. Abrams,[1] appeals, following the granting of his certification to appeal, from the judgment of the habeas court denying his fourth petition for a writ of habeas corpus. He claims that counsel who represented him in the appeal taken from the denial of his first petition for a writ of habeas corpus, John C. Drapp, rendered ineffective assistance by withdrawing the appeal pursuant to Practice Book § 63-9.[2] On appeal, the petitioner asserts that the habeas court erred in concluding that Drapp did not render ineffective assistance by withdrawing the appeal at the petitioner’s direction because his decision to withdraw [192 Conn.App. 852] the appeal was based on Drapp’s poor advice.[3] We disagree and, accordingly, affirm the judgment of the habeas court.

         The following procedural history and facts, as found by the habeas court, are relevant to this appeal. The petitioner was convicted, following a jury trial, of attempt to commit murder in violation of General Statutes § § 53a-49 and 53a-54a (a), assault in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-59 (a) (1), and criminal possession of a firearm in violation of General Statutes § 53a-217. The petitioner’s sentence was enhanced pursuant to

Page 732

General Statutes § 53-202k based on the finding that he committed a class B felony with a firearm. On December 7, 2011, the petitioner was sentenced to a total effective sentence of fifty-one years of incarceration, followed by nine years of special parole.[4] The petitioner subsequently appealed to this [192 Conn.App. 853] court, which affirmed the judgment of the ...


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.