Skakel v. Comm'r of Corr.
Supreme Court of Connecticut
1Opinion of the CourtPalmer, J.
**4*6The sole issue now before us in this appeal by the respondent, the Commissioner of Correction, **5is whether the habeas court properly concluded that the petitioner, Michael Skakel, is entitled to a new trial because counsel in his murder case, Michael Sherman, rendered ineffective assistance by failing to obtain certain readily available evidence that he should have known was potentially critical to the petitioner's alibi defense, that is, the testimony of a disinterested alibi witness whom the habeas court found to be highly credible. Because we agree with the habeas court both that…
Also in this document: Concurrence; Dissent.
2Cases cited149 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Williams v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Harrington v. RichterSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- United States v. AgursSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
144 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Meletrich v. Commissioner of CorrectionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2019
- Jordan v. Commissioner of CorrectionConnecticut Appellate Court · 2020
- Leon v. Commissioner of CorrectionConnecticut Appellate Court · 2019
- Davis v. Commissioner of CorrectionConnecticut Appellate Court · 2020
- Barlow v. Commissioner of CorrectionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2022
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.