Summary
The Connecticut Appellate Court held that the defendant did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to counsel because the trial court failed to explain the limited role of standby counsel and therefore failed to adequately advise him of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation. The court reversed the convictions for first-degree sexual assault, first-degree unlawful restraint, and third-degree assault and remanded for a new trial; it declined to reach the defendant’s due process claim concerning a continuance to obtain a DNA expert.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court adequately canvassed Britto regarding the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation, including the limited role of standby counsel, before accepting his waiver of the right to counsel.
- Whether the trial court violated Britto's due process rights and right to present a defense by denying his request for a continuance to obtain a DNA expert.
Holdings
- The trial court's canvass did not establish that Britto knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel because the court failed to explain the limited role of standby counsel, even though the appointment of standby counsel was integral to his decision to proceed pro se.
Key quotations
“Without such an explanation, we cannot conclude that the defendant was adequately aware of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation.” (slip op. at 20–21)
“The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded for a new trial.” (slip op. at 23–24)
Factual background
In the early morning of July 19, 2018, the complainant accepted a ride from an unknown man, who drove beyond her intended destination, locked the vehicle doors, physically assaulted her, and sexually assaulted her. DNA recovered from the complainant's sexual assault kit matched DNA obtained from Britto, whom the complainant later identified from a photographic array. Britto represented himself at trial with standby counsel and sought a continuance to obtain a DNA expert, but the trial court denied the request after concluding that Britto was responsible for obtaining authorization for expert funding.
Procedural history
The State charged Britto by substitute information in the Superior Court for the judicial district of New Haven. After Britto invoked his right to self-representation, the trial court accepted his waiver and appointed standby counsel. During trial, the court denied his request for a continuance to obtain a DNA expert; the jury convicted him, and the court imposed a total effective sentence of twenty years of incarceration, execution suspended after sixteen years, followed by twenty-five years of probation. The Connecticut Appellate Court reversed and remanded for a new trial.
Remand instructions
The case was remanded for a new trial.