Coleman v. Commissioner of Correction

Connecticut Appellate Court

Coleman v. Commissioner of Correction

784 A.2d 970, 66 Conn. App. 331, 2001 Conn. App. LEXIS 499

CourtConnecticut Appellate Court

DecidedOctober 16, 2001

DocketAC 20302

StatusPublished

This text of 784 A.2d 970 (Coleman v. Commissioner of Correction) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Appellate Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Coleman v. Commissioner of Correction, 784 A.2d 970, 66 Conn. App. 331, 2001 Conn. App. LEXIS 499 (Colo. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The petitioner, Eugene A. Coleman, appeals from the judgment of the habeas court denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. On appeal, the petitioner claims that the court improperly (1) denied certification to appeal from the denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus and (2) abused its discretion in denying the petition.

After a thorough review of the record and briefs, we conclude that the petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing that he has been denied a state or federal constitutional right and, further, has failed to sustain his burden of persuasion that the denial of certification to appeal from the denial of his habeas corpus petition was a clear abuse of discretion or that an injus[332]*332petition was a clear abuse of discretion or that an injustice has been done. See Simms v. Warden, 230 Conn. 608, 612, 646 A.2d 126 (1994); Simms v. Warden, 229 Conn. 178, 189, 640 A.2d 601 (1994); Pollitt v. Commissioner of Correction, 60 Conn. App. 743, 746, 760 A.2d 1278 (2000), cert. denied, 255 Conn. 930, 767 A.2d 101 (2001); see also Lozada v. Deeds, 498 U.S. 430, 431-32, 111 S. Ct. 860, 112 L. Ed. 2d 956 (1991).

The appeal is dismissed

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The petitioner, Eugene A. Coleman, appeals from the judgment of the habeas court denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. On appeal, the petitioner claims that the court improperly (1) denied certification to appeal from the denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus and (2) abused its discretion in denying the petition.

After a thorough review of the record and briefs, we conclude that the petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing that he has been denied a state or federal constitutional right and, further, has failed to sustain his burden of persuasion that the denial of certification to appeal from the denial of his habeas corpus petition was a clear abuse of discretion or that an injus[332]*332petition was a clear abuse of discretion or that an injustice has been done. See Simms v. Warden, 230 Conn. 608, 612, 646 A.2d 126 (1994); Simms v. Warden, 229 Conn. 178, 189, 640 A.2d 601 (1994); Pollitt v. Commissioner of Correction, 60 Conn. App. 743, 746, 760 A.2d 1278 (2000), cert. denied, 255 Conn. 930, 767 A.2d 101 (2001); see also Lozada v. Deeds, 498 U.S. 430, 431-32, 111 S. Ct. 860, 112 L. Ed. 2d 956 (1991).

The appeal is dismissed

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

784 A.2d 970, 66 Conn. App. 331, 2001 Conn. App. LEXIS 499, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coleman-v-commissioner-of-correction-connappct-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack