People v. Caldavado

Summary

The New York Court of Appeals reversed and remitted the case for a hearing on the defendant’s claim that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate and present expert testimony challenging the prosecution’s shaken-baby-syndrome evidence. The court held that the defendant’s submissions raised factual questions concerning counsel’s strategy and adequacy of investigation, while rejecting or declining to reach her newly discovered evidence and freestanding actual innocence claims.

Holdings

1. An evidentiary hearing was required because defendant's submissions raised factual questions about whether counsel's failure to pursue certain defenses and call a medical expert resulted from reasonable trial strategy or inadequate investigation and representation.
2. Defendant's submissions did not constitute newly discovered evidence within the meaning of CPL 440.10(1)(g) and did not warrant further inquiry on remand.
3. The Court did not decide whether a freestanding actual-innocence claim is cognizable, but held that defendant failed to demonstrate factual innocence regardless of the applicable standard of proof.

Questions Presented

1. Whether defendant's CPL 440.10 submissions raised a factual question requiring an evidentiary hearing on whether trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to pursue available lines of cross-examination and failing to call a defense medical expert.
2. Whether defendant's submissions constituted newly discovered evidence under CPL 440.10(1)(g).
3. Whether defendant established a freestanding actual-innocence claim, assuming such a claim is cognizable.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded