State v. Ross

Berdon, J.,

dissenting in part.1 believe that Connecticut’s death penalty statute is facially unconstitu*287tional and may not be applied to the defendant or anyone else. I also believe that the trial court committed harmful error by instructing the jurors, during the guilt phase of the defendant’s trial, that they could draw an adverse inference from the defendant’s failure to call as witnesses a psychiatrist and a psychologist with whom he had consulted concerning his insanity defense.2 I therefore would remand this case for a new, noncapital trial.

Our post-Furman3 death penalty statutes, from…