DocketNumber: No. CV 96 0563626
Citation Numbers: 1998 Conn. Super. Ct. 4284
Judges: CORRIGAN, JUDGE TRIAL REFEREE.
Filed Date: 4/17/1998
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/17/2021
The petitioner produced the testimony of Attorney Williams and Attorney Merkin. Williams testified that he did not raise as an issue in the petition for a writ of habeas corpus for the CT Page 4285 petitioner brought earlier, the alleged eye-witness, Glen Jackson's account of the incident, Petitioner's Exhibit 5, because it was not consistent with the police evidence and the other eye-witnesses at the scene. He further testified that Jackson was known to him from previous contact and was not a credible person and was lying about the event. Ms. Merkin testified that the petitioner had produced that Glen Jackson was an eye-witness who would corroborate the petitioner's account of the shooting of Sharon Little who was shot in the apartment behind a closed apartment door when she drew the gun from her bra and in the struggle with the petitioner for the gun was shot. She found not only was Jackson vague as to where he was during the incident, but both Jackson and her client gave an account different from the state's eye-witnesses to the event who she found credible but also other police evidence from the scene such as that the victim was not wearing a bra and the location of the shell casing at the scene. She conveyed her thoughts about Jackson to the petitioner by letter. Petitioner's Exhibit 6.
Glen Jackson was called by the petitioner and claimed to have been called from his bed downstairs from the victim's apartment by the victim. Jackson testified that he was her "big brother" who helped pacify her relationship with the petitioner and was that night called to break up an argument between the petitioner and one Barbara James. When he did get upstairs and talked to the petitioner and Barbara to leave the apartment, the victim began trying to shoot the petitioner who was struggling for the gun which went off into the victim. He didn't wait around for the police because there was a warrant out for his arrest.
The petitioner has introduced the transcript of the plea of the petitioner and the respondent has introduced the transcript of the sentencing of the petitioner.
It is obvious to the court from a reading of the transcript of the plea proceedings that the petitioner understood far more than Mr. Williams gave him credit for by the difference in the manner the English language was accented. His responses were appropriate on every occasion even though it required moving from a affirmative answer to one that was negative.
For the above reasons the petition is denied with the exception of remanding the matter to Judge O'Keefe for an appropriate correction of sentence consistent with the stated plea bargain.
Corrigan, JTR