Mack v. Commissioner of Correction

Summary

The Connecticut Appellate Court affirmed the denial of Ricardo Mack’s second habeas petition, which alleged ineffective assistance by his prior habeas counsel. The court held that the habeas court abused its discretion in denying certification to appeal because the claims were not frivolous, but concluded on the merits that Mack failed to establish ineffective assistance concerning objections to autopsy evidence or sentence review. The opinion addresses the application of Strickland and Crawford in successive habeas proceedings.

Holdings

1. The habeas court abused its discretion in denying certification because Mack's challenge to the resolution of the autopsy-evidence ineffective-assistance issue was not frivolous and warranted appellate review.
2. Mack failed to prove that either criminal trial counsel or prior habeas counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to raise a Confrontation Clause objection to the autopsy report and Carver's testimony concerning it.
3. Mack failed to establish that prior habeas counsel performed deficiently by not raising a claim that criminal trial counsel was ineffective for failing to advise Mack about or pursue sentence review.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the habeas court abused its discretion by denying Mack's petition for certification to appeal.
2. Whether prior habeas counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to claim that criminal trial counsel was ineffective for not objecting under the Confrontation Clause to the autopsy report and related testimony.
3. Whether prior habeas counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to claim that criminal trial counsel was ineffective for not advising Mack about or pursuing sentence review.

Disposition

affirmed