State v. Britto

Citations

• 236 Conn. App. 131

Syllabus

Convicted of sexual assault in the first degree and other crimes, the defen- dant appealed to this court. He claimed, inter alia, that the trial court failed to adequately make him aware of the dangers and disadvantages of self- representation when canvassing him to determine if his waiver of his right to counsel was made knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently because the court did not explain to him the limited role of standby counsel as set forth in the rule of practice (§ 44-5). Held: The trial court's canvass of the defendant did not establish that he made a knowing and intelligent waiver of his right to counsel, as the court provided him with no information from which he could differentiate between the limited role of standby counsel and that of full counsel, and, without such an explanation, this court could not conclude that the defendant was adequately aware of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation; accordingly, the judgment was reversed and the case was remanded for a new trial. This court, although it declined to address the defendant's claim that the trial court violated his due process rights, including his right to present a defense, when it improperly denied him a continuance to obtain authoriza- tion from the Office of the Chief Public Defender to obtain a DNA expert, noted its concern with the trial court's determination that the defendant himself was solely responsible for obtaining such authorization. Argued June 16—officially released October 28, 2025