Goderre v. Warden, No. Cv 92 1375 S (May 25, 1995)

Connecticut Superior Court

Goderre v. Warden, No. Cv 92 1375 S (May 25, 1995)

1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 5813

CourtConnecticut Superior Court

DecidedMay 25, 1995

DocketNo. CV 92 1375 S

StatusUnpublished

This text of 1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 5813 (Goderre v. Warden, No. Cv 92 1375 S (May 25, 1995)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Superior Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Goderre v. Warden, No. Cv 92 1375 S (May 25, 1995), 1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 5813 (Colo. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]MEMORANDUM OF DECISION (RE: MOTION TO WITHDRAW APPEARANCE) The petitioner has alleged that trial counsel misinformed him as to parole eligibility i.e., that he would serve 35% of his sentence before parole eligibility, and that post-sentencing he learned he had to serve 50% of his sentence to be parole eligible. That claim finds some corroboration in the transcript of May 24, 1991. (The petitioner was sentenced to a term of 32 years.)

If the petitioner relied on gross misadvice about an indirect consequence of his plea — which may include incorrect calculation of parole eligibility, his plea could be invalid. See Falby v.Commissioner of Correction, 32 Conn. App. 438, 446-447 (1993).

This Court does not conclude there is no non-frivolous argument which can be made in support of the petitioner's claim and denies the Motion for Permission to Withdraw Appearance of the Public Defender.

KLACZAK, J.

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

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]MEMORANDUM OF DECISION (RE: MOTION TO WITHDRAW APPEARANCE) The petitioner has alleged that trial counsel misinformed him as to parole eligibility i.e., that he would serve 35% of his sentence before parole eligibility, and that post-sentencing he learned he had to serve 50% of his sentence to be parole eligible. That claim finds some corroboration in the transcript of May 24, 1991. (The petitioner was sentenced to a term of 32 years.)

If the petitioner relied on gross misadvice about an indirect consequence of his plea — which may include incorrect calculation of parole eligibility, his plea could be invalid. See Falby v.Commissioner of Correction, 32 Conn. App. 438, 446-447 (1993).

This Court does not conclude there is no non-frivolous argument which can be made in support of the petitioner's claim and denies the Motion for Permission to Withdraw Appearance of the Public Defender.

KLACZAK, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 5813, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goderre-v-warden-no-cv-92-1375-s-may-25-1995-connsuperct-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack