Walsh v. Commissioner of Correction

Citations

• 233 Conn. App. 66

Syllabus

The petitioner, who previously had been convicted, following a jury trial, of murder, appealed, on the granting of certification, from the judgment of the habeas court dismissing his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. He claimed, inter alia, that the court improperly dismissed count one of his petition on the ground that it was barred by the doctrine of res judicata. Held: The habeas court improperly dismissed count one of the petition on the ground that it was barred by the doctrine of res judicata, as the operative petition in the present case raised a legal ground for relief different from that raised in a previous petition. Pursuant to the Supreme Court's decision in Rose v. Commissioner of Correction (348 Conn. 333), which was issued while this appeal was pending, and which held that ineffective assistance of counsel may constitute an external, objective factor sufficient to establish good cause to excuse the late filing of a habeas petition pursuant to statute (§ 52-470), the habeas court did not apply the correct legal standard when deciding whether the petitioner had demonstrated good cause and, therefore, the petitioner was entitled to a new hearing at which the court must apply the proper legal standard with respect to § 52-470 (d) and (e). Argued January 6—officially released June 3, 2025