ABRAHAMS v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION, No. CV 02-0461618 S (Jul. 18, 2005)


DAVID ABRAHAMS v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION.

2005 Ct. Sup. 11629
No. CV 02-0461618 SConnecticut Superior Court Judicial District of New Haven at New Haven
July 18, 2005

[EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AFTER APPELLATE COURT ORDERED HEARING
DeMAYO, JUDGE TRIAL REFEREE.

Pursuant to the Appellate Court order of June 22, 2005, the court heard the petitioner on July 13, 2005 “to reconsider the petitioner’s application.”

This court had denied a prior application for waiver of fees, costs and expenses and appointment of counsel on appeal.

The petitioner argues that once the trial court determines that the petitioner is indigent, his application must be granted, as the petitioner has an absolute right to appeal. This raises the immediate conflict with § 52-470(b).

Permission to appeal should be granted only if:

a. the issues are debatable among jurists of reason;

b. a court could resolve the issues in a different manner, or
c. the issues raised deserve encouragement to proceed further.

Sims v. Warden, 230 Conn. 608, 618 (1994).

The denial of a petitioner’s petition for certification to appeal can be reviewed only if such denial constitutes an abuse of discretion. Wilson v. Commissioner of Correction, 61 Conn.App. 350, 352 (2001).

As enunciated in its voluminous Memorandum of Decision, this court concludes the petitioner’s application on appeal does not satisfy the requirements noted above and should be denied. CT Page 11630

The court finds the petitioner is indigent and waives fees, costs and expenses and appoints counsel to appeal this
decision.

Anthony V. DeMayo Judge Trial Referee

CT Page 11631