State v. Carlos G.

Summary

The Connecticut Supreme Court affirmed the defendant’s convictions for sexual assault and risk of injury to a child. The court held that specific unanimity instructions adequately protected the defendant’s federal constitutional right to a unanimous jury verdict when individual counts alleged multiple instances of the same statutory violation, and that special unanimity interrogatories were not constitutionally required.

Holdings

1. When a defendant is charged in a single count with violating one statute in multiple separate instances, a proper specific unanimity instruction sufficiently protects the federal constitutional right to a unanimous verdict; the federal constitution does not additionally require the trial court to sua sponte submit special interrogatories concerning each instance.
2. The defendant was not entitled to relief because, although the record was adequate and the claim was constitutionally significant, the trial court did not violate the defendant’s federal constitutional right to a unanimous verdict.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the federal constitutional right to a unanimous jury verdict requires a trial court, in addition to giving a specific unanimity instruction, to sua sponte submit special interrogatories identifying the specific instance of conduct unanimously found by the jury when a single count charges multiple separate violations of the same statute.
2. Whether the defendant’s unpreserved unanimity claim warranted relief under the State v. Golding framework.

Disposition

affirmed