Hickey v. Comm'r of Corr., 329 Conn. 605

Summary

The Connecticut Supreme Court reviewed an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim arising from counsel's failure to request contemporaneous and final limiting instructions concerning prior, uncharged sexual misconduct evidence. The court held that, even assuming deficient performance, the petitioner failed to establish prejudice under Strickland because the overall charge and trial evidence sufficiently protected against an unreliable conviction. The court reversed the Appellate Court insofar as it remanded for further proceedings on the trial-counsel claim and directed judgment denying that claim.

Holdings

1. The petitioner failed to establish a reasonable probability that the trial result would have been different if the final charge had expressly used the word propensity. The charge, read as a whole, adequately instructed the jury that the prior misconduct could not alone establish guilt, that the State bore the burden of proving each charged element, and that Hickey was not on trial for the uncharged conduct.
2. Although a contemporaneous instruction should have been given under DeJesus, counsel's failure to request one did not prejudice the petitioner because the final charge adequately limited the use of the prior misconduct evidence and the jury is presumed to follow the court's instructions.
3. When the habeas court's historical factual findings are undisputed and the issue is the legal application of those facts to the prejudice prong, the appellate court should conduct plenary review rather than remand for a new habeas trial.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the petitioner was prejudiced under Strickland by trial counsel's failure to request a contemporaneous limiting instruction concerning prior uncharged sexual misconduct.
2. Whether the petitioner was prejudiced by trial counsel's failure to request final-charge language expressly limiting the use of the prior misconduct evidence to propensity.
3. Whether the Appellate Court should have conducted plenary review of the prejudice issue rather than remanding for a new habeas hearing.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded