State v. Colon

Colon, 232 Conn. App. 122 (Conn. Ct. App. 2025) · Connecticut Appellate Court · April 22, 2025 · No. AC 46428

Summary

The Connecticut Appellate Court affirmed the defendant's convictions for possession of a controlled substance and operating a motor vehicle with an elevated blood alcohol content. On appeal, the defendant claimed the trial court committed plain error by failing sua sponte to sever the two offenses joined in a single information. The court rejected this claim, holding that the trial court has no automatic duty to sever without a motion and that the defendant may have strategically chosen not to seek severance. The court further found ample evidence supported both convictions.

Court
Connecticut Appellate Court
Writing for the Court
Bright, C. J.; Cradle, J.; Seeley, J.
Jurisdiction
Connecticut
Decision date
April 22, 2025
Docket number
AC 46428
Procedural posture
Defendant appealed convictions for possession of a controlled substance and operating a motor vehicle while having an elevated blood alcohol content.
Standard of review
plain error for joinder claim; sufficiency of the evidence for DUI claim
Precedential value
published
Parties
Luis E. Colon v. State of Connecticut
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

criminal procedureappellate jurisdictionstandard of review

Practice areas

criminal law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the trial court’s failure to sua sponte sever the two offenses joined in a single information constituted plain error.
  2. Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant operated a motor vehicle with an elevated blood alcohol content.

Holdings

  1. The trial court’s failure to sever the offenses sua sponte did not constitute plain error because the defendant could have sought severance via a motion under Practice Book § 41‑18, and the court had no obligation to act sua sponte.
  2. The evidence was sufficient; the jury could reasonably conclude the defendant’s BAC was above 0.08% and thus the conviction is affirmed.

Key quotations

The trial court’s failure to sever the offenses, sua sponte, did not constitute plain error, as the remedy to the purportedly improper joinder was available to the defendant via a motion to sever pursuant to the rule of practice (§ 41‑18), and there was no obligation on the court to consider what might have been a tactical choice by the defendant or his counsel not to pursue a motion to sever.
We conclude that, given the cumulative effect of the evidence in the record, there was more than sufficient evidence to support the jury’s finding that the defendant had an elevated blood alcohol content as required by § 14‑227a (a) (2).

Factual background

During a traffic stop on March 10, 2020, the defendant was observed crossing lanes without a turn signal, was stopped by a state trooper, and was found to have a beer can under the driver’s seat and later a small plastic container containing cocaine. The defendant consented to a pat‑down, performed poorly on three field‑sobriety tests, and submitted to two breath tests showing BAC of 0.1008% and 0.0905%. Expert testimony estimated his BAC at about 0.12% at the time of driving.

Procedural history

The defendant was charged in a single information with two counts—possession of a controlled substance and operating a motor vehicle while having an elevated blood alcohol content—tried before the Superior Court in the Tolland Judicial District, found guilty by jury, and sentenced. The defendant appealed to the Connecticut Appellate Court.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…