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.

King v. Commissioner of Correction

Appellate Court of Connecticut

September 24, 2019

Robert KING
v.
COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION

         Argued January 2, 2019

Page 1052

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 1053

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

         Affirmed.

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

         James M. Ralls, assistant state’s attorney, with whom, on the brief, were Maureen Platt, state’s attorney, and Eva Lenczewski, senior assistant state’s attorney, for the appellee (respondent).

         DiPentima, C. J., and Alvord and Beach, Js.

          OPINION

         BEACH, J.

         [193 Conn.App. 62] The petitioner, Robert King, appeals from the judgment of the habeas court denying in part and [193 Conn.App. 63] dismissing in part his amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus. On appeal, the petitioner claims that the court improperly (1) concluded that the petitioner failed to establish that he had received ineffective assistance from

Page 1054

his trial counsel, and (2) dismissed the petitioner’s claims that his right to due process was violated by the trial court’s not stating on the record its refusal to accept the petitioner’s pretrial plea agreement.[1] We affirm the judgment of the habeas court.

         The following facts and procedural history are relevant to our decision. Following a jury trial, the petitioner was convicted of two counts of assault in the first degree in violation of subdivisions (1) and (3) of General Statutes § 53a-59 (a).[2] During pretrial proceedings and at trial, the petitioner was represented by Attorney Donald O’Brien.

         The petitioner appealed to this court, which reversed his conviction and remanded the case for a new trial. State v. King, 149 Conn.App. 361, 376, 87 A.3d 1193 (2014), rev’d, 321 Conn. 135, 136 A.3d 1210 (2016). Our Supreme Court reversed this court’s judgment and remanded the case to this court with direction to affirm the trial court’s judgment. State v. King, 321 Conn. 135, 158, 136 A.3d 1210 (2016). The petitioner commenced this habeas action, and, after a trial, the habeas court denied in part and dismissed in part his amended habeas petition. The habeas court thereafter granted the petitioner’s petition for certification to appeal, and the petitioner appealed to this court.

         [193 Conn.App. 64] In its decision on the direct appeal, our Supreme Court recited the following relevant facts, which the jury reasonably could have found. "On December 18, 2010, Kyle Neri and Angela Papp went to visit the victim, Kristen Severino, at her residence in Waterbury. Neri and Papp had spent the day getting high on crack cocaine and continued to do so with the victim once they arrived at her residence. While the three were sitting in the victim’s apartment, the [petitioner] entered and began to argue with Neri over an unpaid $10 loan that Neri owed the [petitioner]. As the argument between Neri and the [petitioner] continued to escalate, the [petitioner] went to the apartment’s kitchen and returned, brandishing a steak knife. The [petitioner] began waving the knife around and shouting at Neri and Papp as Neri attempted to physically wrest the knife from the [petitioner’s] control.

         "The victim then intervened in the altercation by attempting to persuade the [petitioner] that Neri should not die over a $10 debt. When her verbal entreaties proved unsuccessful, the victim attempted to physically separate the combatants as the [petitioner] continued to swing the knife at Neri. The [petitioner] then threw the victim against a wall and waved the knife in front of her face. The victim attempted to move and the [petitioner] rapidly stabbed her several times; he then fled the scene." Id., at 138-39, 136 A.3d 1210. Additional facts and procedural history will be set forth as necessary.

          I

         The petitioner claims that the habeas court improperly concluded that his trial counsel did not render ineffective assistance. ...


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.