State v. Outlaw

Citations

• 350 Conn. 251

Syllabus

Convicted of murder, carrying a pistol without a permit, and criminal posses- sion of a firearm, the defendant appealed to this court. The defendant claimed, inter alia, that the trial court had abused its discretion when it failed to question or dismiss a juror who appeared to be sleeping during a portion of the trial and when it admitted evidence that the defendant's alleged coconspirator, R, who had testified pursuant to a cooperation agreement, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit murder in connection with the victim's murder. Held: Because the trial court's inquiry regarding the allegedly sleeping juror, although limited in scope, adequately addressed the purported juror miscon- duct, the defendant could not demonstrate that he was deprived of his right to a fair trial. Although the trial court improperly allowed certain witnesses to testify about their participation in a witness protection program, the defendant did not demonstrate that the admission of that testimony resulted in a manifest injustice requiring reversal. Any error in the trial court's admission of evidence that R had pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit murder, among other crimes, in connection with 252 OCTOBER, 2024 350 Conn. 251 State v. Outlaw the victim's murder was harmless, as that evidence did not substantially impact the jury's verdict. The prosecutor's remark during closing argument that R had taken responsi- bility for her actions by pleading guilty to conspiracy to commit murder did not violate the defendant's right to a jury trial, as that remark was a part of the prosecutor's argument that R was a reliable, credible witness, rather than an implicit criticism of the defendant's exercise of his right to have his case tried before a jury rather than to plead guilty, as R had done. (Two justices concurring in part and concurring in the judgment in one opinion; one justice concurring in part and dissenting in part) Argued February 14—officially released August 6, 2024