DOCSLIB.ORG

State V. Santiago, 305 Conn

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
State V. Santiago, 305 Conn ****************************************************** The ``officially released'' date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the ``officially released'' date appearing in the opinion. In no event will any such motions be accepted before the ``officially released'' date. All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the Connecti- cut Reports and Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the electronic version of an opinion and the print version appearing in the Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Con- necticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the latest print version is to be considered authoritative. The syllabus and procedural history accompanying the opinion as it appears on the Commission on Official Legal Publications Electronic Bulletin Board Service and in the Connecticut Law Journal and bound volumes of official reports are copyrighted by the Secretary of the State, State of Connecticut, and may not be repro- duced and distributed without the express written per- mission of the Commission on Official Legal Publications, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. ****************************************************** STATE OF CONNECTICUT v. EDUARDO SANTIAGO* (SC 17413) Rogers, C. J., and Norcott, Palmer, Zarella, Eveleigh, McDonald and Espinosa, Js.** Argued April 23, 2013Ðofficially released August 25, 2015 Mark Rademacher, assistant public defender, for the appellant (defendant). Harry Weller, senior assistant state's attorney, with whom were Matthew A. Weiner, deputy assistant state's attorney, and, on the brief, Kevin T. Kane, chief state's attorney, Gail P. Hardy, state's attorney, Susan C. Marks, supervisory assistant state's attorney, and Mar- jorie Allen Dauster, Donna Mambrino and John F. Fahey, senior assistant state's attorneys, for the appel- lee (state). Constance de la Vega, pro hac vice, and Hope R. Metcalf filed a brief for experts on international human rights and comparative law as amicus curiae. Alex V. Hernandez and Brian W. Stull filed a brief for legal historians and scholars as amicus curiae. Sandra J. Staub, David J. McGuire and Lauren R. Masotta filed a brief for the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Connecticut as amicus curiae. Kent S. Scheidegger, pro hac vice, and Judith Rossi filed a brief for the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation as amicus curiae. Opinion TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. STATE CONSTITUTIONAL PROHIBITIONS AGAINST CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISH- MENT . A. Federal Constitutional Standards. 1. Inherently Barbaric Punishments . 2. Excessive and Disproportionate Pun- ishments . 3. Arbitrary or Discriminatory Punish- ments . B. Relevant State Constitutional History . 1. Preconstitutional Legal Traditions. 2. 1818 . C. Relevant Constitutional Text . D. Relevant Connecticut Precedents . E. Persuasive Sister State Precedents. F. Conclusion . II. THE DEATH PENALTY FAILS TO COM- PORT WITH CONTEMPORARY STAN- DARDS OF DECENCY. A. Historical Development . B. Legislative Enactments . C. Current Practice . D. Laws and Practices of Other Jurisdic- tions . E. Opinions and Recommendations of Pro- fessional Associations . F. Conclusion . III. THE DEATH PENALTY IS DEVOID OF ANY LEGITIMATE PENOLOGICAL JUSTIFICA- TIONS . A. Deterrence. B. Retribution . 1. Legislative Judgments. 2. Delays . 3. Possibility of Error . 4. Caprice and Bias. C. Vengeance . D. Conclusion . IV. RESPONSE TO THE DISSENTING JUS- TICES . A. Whether the Questions Decided Are Properly before the Court . 1. Arguments Allegedly Not Raised by the Defendant . 2. Opportunity for Briefing . 3. Extra-Record Materials . B. Connecticut's Historical Acceptance of Capital Punishment. C. Whether Deference to the Legislature Requires That We Uphold P.A. 12-5 . V. CONCLUSION . Opinion PALMER, J. Although the death penalty has been a fixture of Connecticut's criminal law since early colo- nial times, public opinion concerning it has long been divided. In 2009, growing opposition to capital punish- ment led the legislature to enact Public Acts 2009, No. 09-107 (P.A. 09-107), which would have repealed the death penalty for all crimes committed on or after the date of enactment but retained the death penalty for capital felonies committed prior to that date. Then Gov- ernor M. Jodi Rell vetoed P.A. 09-107, however, and it did not become law. Three years later, in 2012, the legislature passed a materially identical act that pro- spectively repealed the death penalty; see Public Acts 2012, No. 12-5 (P.A. 12-5); and, this time, Governor Dan- nel P. Malloy signed it into law. During the public hear- ings on both P.A. 09-107 and P.A. 12-5, supporters argued that the proposed legislation represented a mea- sured and lawful approach to the issue. Others raised serious concerns, however, as to whether, following a prospective only repeal, the imposition of the death penalty would violate the state constitutional prohibi- tion against cruel and unusual punishment. Perhaps most notably, Chief State's Attorney Kevin T. Kane, who serves as this state's chief law enforcement officer and represents the state in the present case, testified before the legislature that such a statute could not pass consti- tutional muster.1 Additionally, the Division of Criminal Justice submitted written testimony, in which it advised the legislature that a prospective only repeal would be a ``fiction'' and that, ``[i]n reality, it would effectively abolish the death penalty for anyone who has not yet been executed because it would be untenable as a mat- ter of constitutional law . [A]ny death penalty that has been imposed and not carried out would effectively be nullified.''2 In the present appeal, the defendant, Edu- ardo Santiago, raises similar claims, contending that, following the decision by the elected branches to abol- ish capital punishment for all crimes committed on or after April 25, 2012, it would be unconstitutionally cruel and unusual to execute offenders who committed capi- tal crimes before that date. Upon careful consideration of the defendant's claims in light of the governing consti- tutional principles and Connecticut's unique historical and legal landscape, we are persuaded that, following its prospective abolition, this state's death penalty no longer comports with contemporary standards of decency and no longer serves any legitimate penological purpose. For these reasons, execution of those offend- ers who committed capital felonies prior to April 25, 2012, would violate the state constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Following a trial on charges that included capital felony in violation of General Statutes (Rev. to 1999) § 53a-54b (2)3 and General Statutes § 53a-8, a jury found the defendant guilty as charged, and the trial court, Lavine, J., rendered judgment accordingly.4 The court then conducted a penalty phase hearing pursuant to General Statutes (Rev. to 1999) § 53a-46a, at which the jury found the existence of an aggravating factor, one or more jurors found the existence of one or more mitigating factors, and the jury found that the aggravat- ing factor outweighed the mitigating factor or factors. The trial court thereupon imposed a sentence of death,5 and the defendant appealed to this court from both the judgment of conviction and the death sentence. See State v. Santiago, 305 Conn. 101, 117±18, 49 A.3d 566 (2012) (Santiago I). While the appeal was pending, the legislature repealed the death penalty for all crimes committed on or after the effective date of the repeal, April 25, 2012. See P.A. 12-5. On June 12, 2012, this court ultimately affirmed the judgment of conviction but reversed the sentence of death and remanded the case for a new penalty phase hearing on the ground that the defendant had been deprived of the opportunity to review and use certain potentially mitigating evi- dence. See State v. Santiago, supra, 215, 308. There- after, the defendant filed a motion for reconsideration in which he asked this court to consider, among other things, whether the prospective repeal leads inexorably to the conclusion that capital punishment has ceased to comport with state constitutional requirements. The adoption of P.A. 12-5, when considered in light of the history of capital punishment in our state and other recent legal developments, compels us to conclude that the death penalty now constitutes cruel and unusual punishment, in violation of the state constitution. Con- sequently, we reverse the judgment of the trial court with respect to the sentence of death on the capital felony count and remand the case to that court with direction to sentence the defendant to life imprison- ment without the possibility of release on that count.6 The underlying facts of this case, which are set forth in detail in Santiago I, may be summarized briefly as follows. In December, 2000, Mark Pascual agreed to give the defendant a snowmobile from Pascual's repair shop if the defendant would kill the victim, Joseph Niwinski, for whose girlfriend Pascual had developed romantic feelings. Id., 121. That same month, with the assistance of Pascual and another friend, the defendant entered the victim's apartment and shot and killed the victim as he slept. Id., 123. The defendant was charged with, among other things, the capital felony of ``murder committed by a defendant who is hired to commit the same for pecuniary gain,'' in violation of § 53a-54b (2). In his original appeal to this court, the defendant raised numerous challenges to his conviction of capital felony and his conviction on other charges, as well as his death sentence. Id., 142±46. This court affirmed the defendant's conviction on all counts; see id., 118, 143, 308; and declined his invitation to revisit our prior deci- sions holding that the death penalty is not a per se violation of the Connecticut constitution.7 Id., 307.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Reversible Errors and Errores Juris
    FEDERAL CONVICTIONS REVERSED The following is a publication of the Office of the Federal Public Defender for the Northern District of New York. The cases are from United States Courts of Appeal and the United States Supreme Court. The opinions contain at least one point favorable to criminal defendants. The purpose is to give CJA Panel Attorneys a shortcut to case law favoring their clients. All cases should be researched to see if they are still viable. A precedent in one jurisdiction is not necessarily the law elsewhere. None of the cases should be cited without first reviewing the entire opinion. This warning is especially for prisoners and defendants who wish to rely on the cases herein. A one-line summary cannot possibly be sufficient to cite these cases without first reading each. These materials may be duplicated for any lawyer providing legal services to indigent defendants. Duplication is encouraged. These materials may be reprinted by other free publications or free on-line providers serving the criminal defense bar. Attribution to this office is requested. This collection has previously existed as Reversible Errors and Errores Juris. The new name reflects that coverage is now limited to errors overturning federal criminal convictions, not sentences, nor are other aspects of the criminal justice system addressed. There are two reasons. First, it has been difficult to update so many areas of law on a regular basis. Second, federal sentencing law has changed drastically in recent years and it will take time to determine the common bases for reversal among federal jurisdictions. Updates can be found at www .nynd-fpd.org The publications will be distributed by e-mail in Acrobat 8.0.
    [Show full text]
  • Standards of Prejudice on Appeal
    Appellate Advocacy College 2000 Lecture Standards of Prejudice on Appeal Renee Torres FIRST DISTRICT APPELLATE PROJECT STANDARDS OF REVERSAL on APPEAL in CRIMINAL CASES by Renée E. Torres1 [May 2000] INTRODUCTION 1 These materials incorporate and update “Standards of Review and Prejudice for Instructional Error” by J. Bradley O’Connell & Renée E. Torres (January 1995). FDAP gratefully acknowledges the assistance of Christine Kranich in the preparation of this outline. There are three basic standards of reversal for all criminal cases: (1) automatic reversal (per se) for structural defects in the trial mechanism; (2) reversal unless the State can show that federal constitutional error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt; and (3) reversal for state law error only if appellant can show a reasonable probability of a better outcome. A fourth category of cases do not fit neatly into one of the first three categories. For some of these, the standard of review – i.e., the standard for determining if error occurred – is also the standard of reversal. That is, if the error occurred, it is reversible without further inquiry into prejudice. For others, once error is demonstrated, prejudice is presumed, but may be rebutted by evidence of harmlessness. This outline sets forth examples of reversible errors in all four categories. Because instructional error can call for reversal under any of the three major standards of reversal, it will be dealt with separately in its own section of this outline rather than as an example under each of the three major headings. I. STRUCTURAL DEFECTS AND REVERSAL PER SE "Structural defect" is a relatively new term for an old concept--error which is reversible per se.
    [Show full text]
  • Prosecutors, Prejudices and Justice: Observations on Presuming Innocence in Popular Culture and Law
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Louisiana State University: DigitalCommons @ LSU Law Center Louisiana State University Law Center LSU Law Digital Commons Journal Articles Faculty Scholarship 2003 Prosecutors, Prejudices and Justice: Observations on Presuming Innocence in Popular Culture and Law Christine Corcos Louisiana State University Law Center, christine.corcos@law.lsu.edu Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the Law Commons Repository Citation Corcos, Christine, "Prosecutors, Prejudices and Justice: Observations on Presuming Innocence in Popular Culture and Law" (2003). Journal Articles. 254. https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/faculty_scholarship/254 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at LSU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal Articles by an authorized administrator of LSU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact kreed25@lsu.edu. PROSECUTORS, PREJUDICES AND JUSTICE: OBSERVATIONS ON PRESUMING INNOCENCE IN POPULAR CULTURE AND LAW Christine Alice Corcos • HE rhetoric surrounding the proposed trials of suspected al-Qaeda members Tfor the September 11, 2001 atrocities, as well as the barely suppressed anger . of congressional representatives over formerEnron executive Kenneth Lay's refusal to testify before them, should not surprise anyone who has read Scott Turow's Presumed Innocent, or any of the other books and films that question the presumption of innocence. Indeed, as Turow points out, the presumption of innocence could be considered one of the American legal system's dirtiest little secrets: try as we might, we really have a great deal of trouble accepting that those who are accused might not be guilty, and that the burden of proof lies not with the defendant to exonerate himself but with the prosecution to convict him.
    [Show full text]
  • Presuming Innocence: Alan Pakula and Scott Turow Take on the Great American Legal Fiction
    Louisiana State University Law Center LSU Law Digital Commons Journal Articles Faculty Scholarship 1997 Presuming Innocence: Alan Pakula and Scott Turow Take on the Great American Legal Fiction Christine Corcos Louisiana State University Law Center, christine.corcos@law.lsu.edu Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the Law Commons Repository Citation Corcos, Christine, "Presuming Innocence: Alan Pakula and Scott Turow Take on the Great American Legal Fiction" (1997). Journal Articles. 248. https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/faculty_scholarship/248 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at LSU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal Articles by an authorized administrator of LSU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact kreed25@lsu.edu. PRESUMING INNOCENCE: ALAN PAKULA AND SCOTT TuRow TAKE ON THE GREAT AMERICAN LEGAL FICTION CHRISTINE ALICE CoRcos*t The fi lm Presumed In nocent is the subject of this Article by Prof essor Corcos. She explores the fi lm' s model,s of relationship between law and justice and be­ tween the attorney and layperson. In the film, the pre­ sumption of innocencefo rmally re leases a truly inno­ cent person from legal proceedings, but is unable to release him from informal susp icion by laypersons who seek substantive justice. Using this theme, Prof es­ sor Corcos as sesses the irony and tension present in the fi lm. FORMER PROSECUTOR SET FREE CHARGES AGAINST RUSTY SABICH DISMISSED Spectators were stunned today when Judge Leon Lyttle dismissed murder charges against former D.A.
    [Show full text]
  • Reversible Error Issue New York and Vermont
    The BACK BENCHER Seventh Circuit Federal Defenders Vol. No. 21 Reversible Error Issue New York and Vermont. His column is evidence that, even in the harsh environment of today’s federal courts, DEFENDER’S MESSAGE zealous advocates are ensuring the rights of their clients through the engine of reversible error. We should strive to Reversible error is the sword and shield of every criminal do the same. defense lawyer. At trial, the criminal defense lawyer can preemptively protect his client from prejudice by bringing As part of our continuing effort to help fulfill this the potential for reversible error to the attention of the trial exhortation, a number of continuing legal education judge, thereby preventing an error before it occurs. On opportunities are on the horizon for our panel attorneys. appeal, knowledge of what constitutes reversible error Three national CJA training programs are scheduled for allows the defense lawyer to retroactively shield his client this year at the following locations and dates: Kansas City, from the effects of impermissible prosecutorial blows MO on May 18-20; Boston, MA on July 6-8; and San already suffered. But reversible error is more than a Antonio, TX on September 21-23. An application for weapon in the arsenal of the criminal defense lawyer; it is these programs is attached to the back of this issue of The also an engine for change. Landmark decisions such as Back Bencher. Incidentally, I have preliminarily accepted Gideon v. Wainwright Brady v. , 372 U.S. 335 (1963) and an offer to speak at each of these programs.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evidence Rules That Convict the Innocent
    William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository Faculty Publications Faculty and Deans 1-2021 The Evidence Rules That Convict the Innocent Jeffrey Bellin William & Mary Law School, jbellin@wm.edu Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs Part of the Evidence Commons Repository Citation Bellin, Jeffrey, "The Evidence Rules That Convict the Innocent" (2021). Faculty Publications. 2020. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs/2020 Copyright c 2021 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs \\jciprod01\productn\C\CRN\106-2\CRN201.txt unknown Seq: 1 4-MAR-21 9:58 THE EVIDENCE RULES THAT CONVICT THE INNOCENT Jeffrey Bellin† Over the past decades, DNA testing has uncovered hun- dreds of examples of the most important type of trial errors: innocent defendants convicted of serious crimes like rape and murder. The resulting Innocence Movement spurred reforms to police practices, forensic science, and criminal procedure. This Article explores the lessons of the Innocence Movement for American evidence law. Commentators often overlook the connection between the growing body of research on convictions of the innocent and the evidence rules. Of the commonly identified causes of false convictions, only flawed forensic testimony has received sus- tained attention as a matter of evidence law. But other impor- tant contributors, like mistaken identifications and unreliable confessions, also pass through evidence rules. These path- ways to admission go unquestioned today but are the result of long-forgotten policy choices that were once controversial pre- cisely because they increase the likelihood of convicting the innocent.
    [Show full text]
  • Seasoned to the Use
    Michigan Law Review Volume 87 Issue 6 1989 Seasoned to the Use Carol Sanger Santa Clara Law School Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr Part of the Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law Commons Recommended Citation Carol Sanger, Seasoned to the Use, 87 MICH. L. REV. 1338 (1989). Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol87/iss6/14 This Review is brought to you for free and open access by the Michigan Law Review at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Michigan Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact mlaw.repository@umich.edu. SEASONED TO THE USE Carol Sanger* PRESUMED INNOCENT. By Scott Turow. New York: Warner. 1987. Pp. 421. Paper, $4.95. "A brutal murder creates a crisis." 1 THE GOOD MOTHER. By Sue Miller. New York: Harper & Row. 1986. Pp. 310. Paper, $4.95. "A woman's attachment to her daughter becomes a consuming passion. "2 Two recent novels, Presumed Innocent and The Good Mother, have more in common than critical success, 3 longevity on best-seller lists, and big-name movie adaptations.4 Both books are about law: Pre­ sumed Innocent is a tale of murder in the big city; The Good Mother is the story of a custody fight over a little girl. Central characters in both books are lawyers. Turow is a lawyer, and Miller thanks lawyers. While the books could be classified in other ways-Presumed Innocent as mystery, The Good Mother as women's fiction-each meets a sug­ gested genre specification of a legal novel: "the presence .
    [Show full text]
  • Scott Turow Testimony Paperback
    Scott Turow Testimony Paperback Gerrit remains resolutive: she communicated her wristlet relaid too manneristically? Is Etienne always Lindseyintercrossed broider and his Euclidean ditches telecastswhen gainsayings not secretly some enough, incombustibility is Maddie whiny?very indissolubly and whereby? When Nam interdum aliquam sapien nisi nisl lacinia mi et molestie, scott turow testimony paperback today, who subsequently turned, though nobody in one ls are not be interested in their country are. Only ever open the hague, uneven thriller series in a scott turow testimony paperback today bestseller detective and. In gratuitous or download all turow books where you an interesting and peace to move from bestselling author for our price, a distraught father approaches private. Reunited with his charismatic lawyer Sandy Stern, Rusty will do anything to convince his beloved son Nat of his innocence. Of the scott turow testimony paperback today. Eleven years later, the International Criminal Court at the Hague, which tries mass atrocities, pursues the case. The icc and boards a pro quo, who is the massacre in england and. Please help you section of his work efforts to be with misperceptions, scott turow testimony paperback today, and turow for. Who knew what, and who did what? Narration was well written, scott turow testimony paperback today, raise their relationship with some extent, we have won a coworker who stressed the inner workings of. Mostly in his kindle county, ferko rincic himself at every aspect of scott turow testimony paperback today. Deception and a Cotton Malone dossier. Of who find more confusing and draw attention to immerse ourselves in an entire roma refugee gypsies in south africa from scott turow testimony paperback today bestseller detective and change in canada by it pursues kindle county.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evidence Rules That Convict the Innocent
    \\jciprod01\productn\C\CRN\106-2\CRN201.txt unknown Seq: 1 4-MAR-21 9:58 THE EVIDENCE RULES THAT CONVICT THE INNOCENT Jeffrey Bellin† Over the past decades, DNA testing has uncovered hun- dreds of examples of the most important type of trial errors: innocent defendants convicted of serious crimes like rape and murder. The resulting Innocence Movement spurred reforms to police practices, forensic science, and criminal procedure. This Article explores the lessons of the Innocence Movement for American evidence law. Commentators often overlook the connection between the growing body of research on convictions of the innocent and the evidence rules. Of the commonly identified causes of false convictions, only flawed forensic testimony has received sus- tained attention as a matter of evidence law. But other impor- tant contributors, like mistaken identifications and unreliable confessions, also pass through evidence rules. These path- ways to admission go unquestioned today but are the result of long-forgotten policy choices that were once controversial pre- cisely because they increase the likelihood of convicting the innocent. This Article highlights these, and other, overlooked impli- cations of the Innocence Movement. It argues that the discov- ery and ongoing chronicle of hundreds of false convictions present a unique opportunity to reevaluate American evidence law. This reevaluation could lead to innocence-protective changes to existing evidence rules and a welcome infusion of energy into evidence policymaking and commentary. † Professor, William & Mary Law School. Thanks to Ron Allen, Ed Cheng, Brandon Garrett, Sandra Mayson, Fred Moss, Mark Spottswood, Maggie Wittlin, and the participants in the Vanderbilt Summer Evidence Workshop, and the SMU Law School Faculty Forum for comments on an early draft.
    [Show full text]
  • Maryland Commission on Capital Punishment
    MARYLAND COMMISSION ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT FINAL REPORT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY December 12, 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS............................................................................................................... 2 COMMISSIONER LIST................................................................................................................ 4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS FROM THE CHAIRMAN.................................................................. 6 INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................... 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................ 9 1. RACIAL DISPARITIES ................................................................................................. 10 2. JURISDICTIONAL DISPARITIES................................................................................ 12 3. SOCIO-ECONOMIC DISPARITIES ............................................................................. 14 4. THE COMPARISON OF COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH DEATH SENTENCES AND THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH SENTENCES OF LIFE IMPRISONMENT WITHOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF PAROLE ........................................................................................... 15 5. THE EFFECTS OF PROLONGED COURT CASES INVOLVING CAPITAL PUNISHMENT AND THOSE INVOLVING LIFE IMPRISONMENT WITHOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF PAROLE...................................................................................................
    [Show full text]