Ross v. Commissioner of Correction

Citations

• 337 Conn. 718

Syllabus

The petitioner, who had been convicted of murder, sought a writ of habeas corpus, claiming, inter alia, that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to object to certain improper remarks by the prose- cutor during closing argument. Specifically, the prosecutor stated in her closing argument that the state's firearms expert, S, had testified that a purposeful trigger pull was required to fire the petitioner's gun, even though S did not make that statement and was prevented from answering the prosecutor's leading question to that effect when the petitioner's trial counsel successfully objected to it. The habeas court rendered judgment denying the petition, concluding that the petitioner had failed to demonstrate that he suffered prejudice. On the granting of certifica- tion, the petitioner appealed to the Appellate Court, which affirmed the habeas court's judgment. The Appellate Court concluded that, although at least one of the prosecutor's remarks during closing argument was improper, the doctrine of collateral estoppel barred the petitioner from litigating the issue of prejudice because, in the petitioner's direct appeal from his conviction, the Appellate Court already had determined, in the context of resolving his claim of prosecutorial impropriety, that the same improper remarks did not prejudice him. Thereafter, the petitioner, on the granting of certification, appealed to this court. Held: 1. The Appellate Court incorrectly concluded that the petitioner was collater- ally estopped from litigating the issue of whether he was prejudiced by his trial counsel's failure to object to the prosecutor's improper remarks during closing argument, as the issue in the present case was not identi- cal to that presented in the petitioner's direct appeal of his conviction: 15 In his reply brief, the defendant concedes that, under the circumstances presented, an adverse decision on his due process claim also would require an adverse decision on his eighth